RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master



Message

CaptR -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/12/2014 5:49:50 PM)

TPE can be attained under many parameters. Part time, full time virtually any scenario people agree on. We no longer live in a society where slavery and submission are involuntary unless it's being carried out without ethics or illegally. That volunteerism of allowing oneself to be controlled by an individual of choice is tailored to fit. Relationship considerations are just one aspect of the equation. It's recognized TPE and "ownership" are two different subjects at times. One may experience TPE without ownership but a valid argument could be presented that one does not experience ownership without TPE.



CaptR -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/12/2014 6:23:53 PM)

I'm in agreement. TPE can be attained without ownership with the reverse being a far more difficult and complex scenario.



CloakedProtector -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/13/2014 2:07:09 AM)

All negotiated BDSM is Partial Power Exchange by definition.

I have never heard of PTE in the meaning of a variation on TPE which doesn't mean there isn't anything out there like that.
As written in the post to OP the 24/7 variation offers more possibilities and if partners live together it is certainly the most attractive form.

Therefore one also may have the impression that 24/7 TPE is the only form or that most TPE is in that relation form. But as the word "most" implies not all because 24/7 isn't a requirement for TPE.

This blog may help because it is a) well written, b) correct.
http://kimdebron.tripod.com/id16.html

However, the T of Total in TPE has, as far as I have always known, always made reference at the degree of Power Exchange and, personally, I will stick to that definition and not give it my own meaning.

In TPE the control transfer is at the very detailed level. The sub/slave almost doesn't move without the permission of the Dominant or outside something he/she was told to do. Using the bathroom is on request, dress code, food take in (when/what), everything is controlled in TPE. It is extremely demanding and easier in small windows. In other words the TPE is about TOTAL Power Exchange and has nothing to do, IMO and of the established definitions, with the time windows.

The above level of power exercise can be practices easily during a few hours, a week-end or indeed 24/7/365.
Then of course players can reduce the level of control but the submissive very quickly loose the TPE related feeling when control is given up.



FieryOpal -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/13/2014 3:47:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CloakedProtector

All negotiated BDSM is Partial Power Exchange by definition.
<snip>
Therefore one also may have the impression that 24/7 TPE is the only form or that most TPE is in that relation form. But as the word "most" implies not all because 24/7 isn't a requirement for TPE.
....
However, the T of Total in TPE has, as far as I have always known, always made reference at the degree of Power Exchange and, personally, I will stick to that definition and not give it my own meaning.

In TPE the control transfer is at the very detailed level....


Frankly, I would agree that realistically, the concept of TPE can only be achieved in the type of high-protocol M/s dynamic of which you have referred.
Further, that it would typically require a 24/7 live-in situation to reach an optimal Master-Mistress/slave level of control, outside work obligations notwithstanding.
And that furthermore, more D-types & s-types use the term TPE loosely as a catch-all for D/s authority dynamics, regardless of either degree or time windows.
This is one of the reasons why I personally do not seek a slave, but a submissive instead, since I'm not looking for (a 24/7) TPE M/s (as distinct from the broader D/s) relationship;
and without prejudice for what others desire for themselves, I don't believe in consensual slavery in this sense, which tends to imply consent given once-and-for-all or a more curtailed form of consensuality.

In fact, a submissive friend of mine who has been involved in a limited (but committed) time-window D/s for many years told me just the other day:
"Feeling TPE might actually be better than experiencing it. The same thing goes for slavery."
Granted with or without varying BDSM elements, all D/s boils down to the practical application and then implementation of a mutually agreed-upon fantasy construct of sorts.
Without all parties involved being on the same page, and staying there, TPE or no TPE, both Dominant and submissive have built themselves a house of cards IMO.



freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/13/2014 5:02:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CloakedProtector
All negotiated BDSM is Partial Power Exchange by definition.

Really??

Sub/slave says: I give my all, unconditionally and completely.
Dom/me says: Ok. It's a done deal.

And that's only Partial?? How does that work in your book??


Then you say -
quote:

ORIGINAL: CloakedProtector
In TPE the control transfer is at the very detailed level
Which I don't agree with either.
Power Exchange and Micro-management are two separate issues which may (or may not) overlap.

Perhaps you ought to read some of the text in the link you gave.
Particularly where it says "There is also the common misconception that a TPE involves micromanaging of the slave – in other words every single moment of the slave’s life is managed and decided by the Dominant".
Note the words common misconception.

The author goes on to state: "My Master and i have a TPE relationship but i am not micromanaged" and further qualifies that by saying "i have given over the total control of my life to my Master, it gives me a sense of freedom, yet i am constrained within His guidelines for my life. It gives me a sense of purpose, yet the decisions are His"


And further -
quote:

ORIGINAL: CloakedProtector
It is extremely demanding and easier in small windows
Maybe in your world - but not in mine.
The major difference being that I don't (and don't have to) micromanage.



I would also disagree with FO.
quote:

ORIGINAL: FieryOpal
Frankly, I would agree that realistically, the concept of TPE can only be achieved in the type of high-protocol M/s dynamic of which you have referred.

I don't think that the concept of TPE is reliant on the level of protocol.
You can just as easily have a low-protocol setting but still have TPE in its completeness.

And this, IMHO, is absolutely crucial -
quote:

ORIGINAL: FieryOpal
Without all parties involved being on the same page, and staying there, TPE or no TPE, both Dominant and submissive have built themselves a house of cards




Arturas -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/13/2014 5:51:26 AM)

Yup. 1+1+1 <> 2.
Total does not mean sometimes.



FieryOpal -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/13/2014 6:18:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Sub/slave says: I give my all, unconditionally and completely.
Dom/me says: Ok. It's a done deal.

And that's only Partial?? How does that work in your book??
<snip>

Since you're a couple, is it at all possible that either of you know any male subs like this who aren't GUD-Geographically UnDesirable? [8D]



thompsonx -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/13/2014 7:21:20 AM)


ORIGINAL: FieryOpal

By the same token a married man, whether in an open marriage or not, cannot be "owned" by his "Mistress." He is already owned by his wife. They could agree to share ownership, but this would hardly be TPE.


Roflmfao...I am trying to wrap my head around "shared ownership".
Wife gets pissed at husband for what ever reason. Wife calls mistress and tells her of the husbands transgressions and suggests that huband needs an ass whippen. Husband comes home from work and is told to report to his mistresses house by wife. Husband receives an unscheduled ass whippen and orders to improve his behaviour. Husband goes home to wife and appologizes for what ever it was that pissed her off.
Somehow in my mind this appears win win win.



FieryOpal -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/13/2014 7:26:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
ORIGINAL: FieryOpal

By the same token a married man, whether in an open marriage or not, cannot be "owned" by his "Mistress." He is already owned by his wife. They could agree to share ownership, but this would hardly be TPE.

Roflmfao...I am trying to wrap my head around "shared ownership".
Wife gets pissed at husband for what ever reason. Wife calls mistress and tells her of the husbands transgressions and suggests that huband needs an ass whippen. Husband comes home from work and is told to report to his mistresses house by wife. Husband receives an unscheduled ass whippen and orders to improve his behaviour. Husband goes home to wife and appologizes for what ever it was that pissed her off.
Somehow in my mind this appears win win win.

Or how about this scenario? Husband gets ass-whipping by BOTH wife and Mistress--for having pissed off wife and upsetting the applecart so that now Mistress and husband's D/s arrangement got impacted by pissed-off wife!



freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/13/2014 8:08:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FieryOpal


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Sub/slave says: I give my all, unconditionally and completely.
Dom/me says: Ok. It's a done deal.

And that's only Partial?? How does that work in your book??
<snip>

Since you're a couple, is it at all possible that either of you know any male subs like this who aren't GUD-Geographically UnDesirable? [8D]

For TPE arrangements, I do not acknowledge that it can happen (properly) when the sub/slave isn't 24/7 with the M or D.
Otherwise, it's not Total.
That is why I took issue with CloakedProtector's statement of "All negotiated BDSM is Partial Power Exchange by definition".
My example was a negotiated arrangement (and utterly total) and is not 'partial' in any sense of the word.



thompsonx -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/13/2014 8:51:59 AM)


ORIGINAL: FieryOpal


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
ORIGINAL: FieryOpal

By the same token a married man, whether in an open marriage or not, cannot be "owned" by his "Mistress." He is already owned by his wife. They could agree to share ownership, but this would hardly be TPE.

Roflmfao...I am trying to wrap my head around "shared ownership".
Wife gets pissed at husband for what ever reason. Wife calls mistress and tells her of the husbands transgressions and suggests that huband needs an ass whippen. Husband comes home from work and is told to report to his mistresses house by wife. Husband receives an unscheduled ass whippen and orders to improve his behaviour. Husband goes home to wife and appologizes for what ever it was that pissed her off.
Somehow in my mind this appears win win win.

Or how about this scenario? Husband gets ass-whipping by BOTH wife and Mistress--for having pissed off wife and upsetting the applecart so that now Mistress and husband's D/s arrangement got impacted by pissed-off wife!

I was considering the wife more in the light of a tolerant vanilla who recognzes her husbands needs that she is not interested in fulfilling(bdsm stuff). She sees the domme as a tool for controlling her husband in the vanilla aspects of his life. She does not have to involve herself in the "dirty work" of punishment but instead derives the benifit of having him punished by another while she herself gets to maintain the "moral high ground".
"It was your mistress who felt your behaviour was wrong and punished you...not me"...me and pontious pilate have clean hands.[;)]



FieryOpal -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/13/2014 8:57:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: FieryOpal

Or how about this scenario? Husband gets ass-whipping by BOTH wife and Mistress--for having pissed off wife and upsetting the applecart so that now Mistress and husband's D/s arrangement got impacted by pissed-off wife!

I was considering the wife more in the light of a tolerant vanilla who recognzes her husbands needs that she is not interested in fulfilling(bdsm stuff). She sees the domme as a tool for controlling her husband in the vanilla aspects of his life. She does not have to involve herself in the "dirty work" of punishment but instead derives the benifit of having him punished by another while she herself gets to maintain the "moral high ground".
"It was your mistress who felt your behaviour was wrong and punished you...not me"...me and pontious pilate have clean hands.[;)]

I still prefer my scenario better. [:-]



CreativeDominant -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/13/2014 11:10:51 PM)

After reading through the o.p. and the responses, I have to add my two cents: I've been involved in the past with a long- distance submissive. She wanted to play with others and stay with me as her dominant. We tried but eventually, it blew apart. Distance played a huge part but so did the influence of closer play partners. While there were, admittedly, other clashings, these were enhanced by other influences.
I've also been involved with a submissive right here in my town who was separated from her husband. That was an influence though she made a sincere effort not to let it be. Still, the husband finally pulled her back ( as did her kids).
So...what am I saying? I prefer a submissive willing to spend time with me and moving towards ever more time. I prefer one unencumbered with an ongoing relationship or just coming out of one...not someone looking back or looking at another "view" besides me. While D/s is indeed a negotiation of exchange of power, the degree is what is decided between the two. I don't expect a submissive to give me 100% power over her at the start but even with that, I don't want my percentage cut due to an ongoing romance-based relationship elsewhere. Children? Sure. Older parents (wish I had some)? Sure. Job responsibilities? Sure. Those are all sewn into discussion. But a romantic/partner claim on the heart? No...not at this point in My life. I am the primary or for me, it is play or I am a friend.



CloakedProtector -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/14/2014 7:20:36 AM)

But again, the word TOTAL stands for the extend of the power exchange, namely 100%.

The word TOTAL does not stand for the period of play. If it is 24/7 it is for sure TOTAL/TOTAL so to say, but one can take TOTAL power over someone for a limited time period. because if TOTAL would include 'time' it would at least have to mean 'until the sub dies" because ones you stop it would become 'non total' any more and so today nobody would be able to say they are in a TPE because you do not know for sure it could/would end against your expectations.

But we may disagree on that.



DesFIP -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/15/2014 6:34:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CloakedProtector


In TPE the control transfer is at the very detailed level. The sub/slave almost doesn't move without the permission of the Dominant or outside something he/she was told to do. Using the bathroom is on request, dress code, food take in (when/what), everything is controlled in TPE. It is extremely demanding and easier in small windows. In other words the TPE is about TOTAL Power Exchange and has nothing to do, IMO and of the established definitions, with the time windows.



So the dominant isn't allowed to delegate authority to the submissive? He/she can't say "hey I'm getting home late from work, have dinner ready at 7" because unless they specify which portions of chicken, exactly how much barbecue sauce, precisely how to cook the potato then they're poseurs?

Micromanagement isn't required for a TPE. The only thing that is required is that the dominant can decide to make any decision he or she wants to make.

The way you describe it, the dominant is in fact the slave. Having to do all these things that may not interest him or her at all.



Blonderfluff -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/15/2014 7:04:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CloakedProtector

But again, the word TOTAL stands for the extend of the power exchange, namely 100%.

The word TOTAL does not stand for the period of play. If it is 24/7 it is for sure TOTAL/TOTAL so to say, but one can take TOTAL power over someone for a limited time period. because if TOTAL would include 'time' it would at least have to mean 'until the sub dies" because ones you stop it would become 'non total' any more and so today nobody would be able to say they are in a TPE because you do not know for sure it could/would end against your expectations.

But we may disagree on that.

What an ignorant and narrow-minded point of view. So, everyone else is doing it wrong?????? I'll be sure to spread the word.....



SIrJerryTucsonaz -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/15/2014 7:24:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP


quote:

ORIGINAL: CloakedProtector


In TPE the control transfer is at the very detailed level. The sub/slave almost doesn't move without the permission of the Dominant or outside something he/she was told to do. Using the bathroom is on request, dress code, food take in (when/what), everything is controlled in TPE. It is extremely demanding and easier in small windows. In other words the TPE is about TOTAL Power Exchange and has nothing to do, IMO and of the established definitions, with the time windows.



So the dominant isn't allowed to delegate authority to the submissive? He/she can't say "hey I'm getting home late from work, have dinner ready at 7" because unless they specify which portions of chicken, exactly how much barbecue sauce, precisely how to cook the potato then they're poseurs?

Micromanagement isn't required for a TPE. The only thing that is required is that the dominant can decide to make any decision he or she wants to make.

The way you describe it, the dominant is in fact the slave. Having to do all these things that may not interest him or her at all.


This is getting a bit off subject to the original question in regards to Having a TPE or seeking a TPE relationship while involved with another, Not about the amount of micromanaging involved or lack of. I was looking for opinions and others thoughts, What one views may be different than another.



CloakedProtector -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/16/2014 2:54:23 AM)

DesFIP and Blonderfluff, you are both reading things that are not there.

Blonderfluff, no not everybody is doing it wrong. Who said that, certainly not me.
TPE is a play about a level of control that exceeds the NORMAL traditional (other play) level of control.
So by definition there is more power transfer as in the normal, even 24/7/365, M/s relationships. That is why you'll find qualification such as 24/7 TPE in requests and offering exactly to emphasize that that extra level of detail (degree to be filled in by the Dominant) is sought for.
Furthermore I have not been making any claim as to how play partners should fill in there TPE, in 24/7 or in windows, or if TOTAL means micromanagement or some less level of control.

DesFIP, I have not been saying that micromanagement was required, someone else brought up the micromanagement.
I have only said it can be demanding in the beginning and that the level of power exchange (transfer) is higher in TPE.
And yes, in the window (or 24/7) the level of detail could indeed go down to the micromanagement level if that is desired.
But dress codes, movement restriction (as in going and being were you want), food control, etc are certainly practices of TPE if Dominants want to practice them, including bathroom usage. I think it is that part that made you related my post to micro-management although it was a list of examples.

You wrote:
"So the dominant isn't allowed to delegate authority to the submissive?"
It is not clear how you come to that conclusion. In TPE a Dominant fills in the level of control. If he wants to drum the chewing level when you eat he could do so, but he can limit control in that area to when, or when and what, or when what and were, etc you eat. (as an example).

And about
"The way you describe it, the dominant is in fact the slave."
Well, in a way this would have been through if the Dominant wasn't seeking TPE. Now they use something called "standing rules" which are things the Dominant will not repeat every time. Things the sub/slave knows and will do automatically. Yet, your statement is one that is often used but I don't think TPE play partners experience it like that or they wouldn't be doing TPE if they don't want that, would they.



Arturas -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/19/2014 9:43:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CloakedProtector

The word TOTAL does not stand for the period of play. If it is 24/7 it is for sure TOTAL/TOTAL so to say, but one can take TOTAL power over someone for a limited time period. because if TOTAL would include 'time' it would at least have to mean 'until the sub dies" because ones you stop it would become 'non total' any more and so today nobody would be able to say they are in a TPE because you do not know for sure it could/would end against your expectations.

But we may disagree on that.


I think if we were arguing in the court of BDSM you would probably be right. But I suggest a temporary TPE, as you describe it, fits the description of a common BDSM scene and perhaps that is correct and just as valid. To be honest, I don't think of it much at all but I do enjoy watching those here who are closer to the subject.



Arturas -> RE: Subs and slaves with outside partners???? (7/19/2014 9:56:41 PM)

quote:

The way you describe it, the dominant is in fact the slave. Having to do all these things that may not interest him or her at all.



Agree with both statements. I cannot see myself micromanaging as it would be too wearing. TPE does not mean one or the other has no freedom to be a thinking human, a caring person and even a spontaneous lover. Or does it? If it does then please count me out.



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

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.296875E-02