FieryOpal
Posts: 2821
Joined: 12/8/2013
From: Maryland
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BecomingV
I'm expecting it to become accepted when a woman says she has to ask her Master/Dom's permission before she can agree to accept an invitation. However, I'm not expecting any quick changes in the acceptance of a man saying he has to ask his Master/Domme's permission before agreeing to accept an invitation because vanilla life puts such strict limits on manhood.
Strictly from a vanilla standpoint, I would have to say that ever since I can remember, it's been socially acceptable for couples to have to run by their social engagements, activities, and jointly coordinated schedules with one another prior to making any changes in plans or making a commitment with outside parties (including family members) which will invariably affect the other partner in some way.
In fact, once you are an item, it is expected and understood that to NOT do so would be a discourtesy, as would expecting one half of a couple to neglect to run something by the other half, even in a perfunctory fashion. Are there *wink*winks and *nod*nods? Sure, there can be, such as when it appears that a new couple is prematurely allowing one partner to take control over the other's decision-making abilities.
How many times have single friends suddenly found that their attached friend can no longer join in with them as a group? Now that Sally is with her new boyfriend, she's never available to do things with her circle of gf's. When my best friend of over a decade got engaged, and then later married, I never saw her anymore. It was the standard indefinite, "Oh, we have to get together some time and...," which doesn't happen unless you can make plans together as couples or as a family outing.
Bachelors are going to look at their newly attached buddy as being pussy-whipped, but a lot of that is sour grapes.
Nobody blinked an eye when a married man, such as my dad, would say he had to check with or run it by the missus first. Very, very common. And believe me, nobody would have thought that my dad was henpecked (and my mom didn't make him feel that way either).
The same with my mother saying that she would check with my dad first on something. That's just what considerate partners do.
The only time it becomes an issue is when it appears to others that somebody is being overly controlled, has anxiety, or is not happy in their relationship with an oppressive partner.
Yes, it will be a long while before it is socially acceptable to say "My Master this..." or "My Mistress that...," but then, why should it be common knowledge or open up a Pandora's Box of nosey questions? There's nothing wrong with keeping what's private, private.
My friends, family, business associates & co-workers, and ordinary folk don't need to know what goes on in my home, much less in my bedroom. It's none of their damn business. 
P.S. About the S&M distinctions. Sado-masochism is how one can differentiate between (criminal) sadism and (self-destructive or pathological) masochism, from what I understand. I've used these terms interchangeably here, as do many, in describing themselves as a Kind Sadist or a Sensual Sadist, because it's understood in a consensual BDSM context. To someone not familiar with BDSM, it can be helpful to make this distinction, that one is a sado-masochist, not a (psychopathological) Sadist. Legalities aside, since those are separate mechanisms, of course.
_____________________________
Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength, while loving someone deeply gives you courage. - Lao Tzu
There is no remedy for love but to love more. - Thoreau
|
RE: The Future of the BDSM Community - 
Profile
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