DF/sm LTR without coitus? (Full Version)

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



Message

whitebottomboy -> DF/sm LTR without coitus? (6/7/2015 6:28:10 AM)

Hello. This is my first query on CS.

I am curious to know how common, or rare, it is for a 100% dominant female to be in a committed relationship with a sub male (including LTRs, marriage, etc.) where penile-vaginal penetration and intercourse has never and will never occur.

I am specifically NOT talking about cuckolding, where she has intercourse with other men rather than her sub.

I mean a dominant female who considers herself as hetero or bi with male preference, who has active and mutually participative sexual relations with her sub, yet who never receives vaginal penetration, because she does not desire or enjoy it. So that it plays no part in her life, other than what desire or satisfaction she has in denying his inherent male cravings to have penile-vaginal coitus with her.

I am not asking because I have fantasies related to this, so I am not looking for answers from people who make such claims for their own fantasy fulfillment.

I am hoping to hear from people whose opinions or experiences are based in reality. Thanks.



Miyani -> RE: DF/sm LTR without coitus? (6/7/2015 9:49:43 AM)

Quick answer: as far as I've seen, it's not common, but it does happen.

The majority of the dominant women I know want full relationships with their submissives, including romance and sex. I'm one of those. However, I do personally know a couple of dominant women who don't have sex with anyone, including their submissives. However, romance, affection, and play are still present. I also personally know one submissive man who was in a 7-year D/s relationship, the last 4 years of which involved no sex at all. He was locked up the vast majority of that time, though cunnilingus, edging, and teasing and denial were still present.

If you can imagine a certain relationship style or scenario, it probably exists. That one for sure does. But it's a bit of a niche.



whitebottomboy -> RE: DF/sm LTR without coitus? (6/7/2015 1:42:03 PM)

Thank you Miyani, for your concise reply, opinion and examples.

I am about to embark on my first real life experience, which I believe will begin in a spanking-centric way, but with a lifestyle domme who is much more a private citizen rather than a player in the scene, as it were.

And while it may prove irrelevant, since our contact may not go beyond basic tutelage in D/s dynamics, genuine sexual attraction has been acknowledged from both parties, and particularly strongly from my point of view. So the potential of this evolving into a dating relationship or long term, significant-other relationship is there.

But it is has been made clear that her preference at all times is that penile-vaginal penetration play no part in her lifestyle, beyond what she derives through its permanent denial.

I have read about such things but always took them to be imaginary fantasy fulfillment writings by sub males or sub wanna-bes who have no experience, like me. So I was surprised to encounter a woman who adheres to the concept as a hard limit, so soon into my first attempts at real life contact.

I am not particularly thrilled with the idea. But it does hold some fascination for me, and will always be there in my mind as this new connection unfolds.

I can understand why some couples "don't have sex at all" either in a D/s power way like your friend, or in a domestic falling out of love/lust way. But I am curious to learn more about the mindset and hows and whys of dommes who truly do want traditional coitus intercourse, while still having an active sex life with their significant other, or others in some cases. Particularly those who are not basically Lesbian but have male subs or slaves.

So I thank you again as the first person to offer a reply to my query.




dreamlady -> RE: DF/sm LTR without coitus? (6/7/2015 8:48:42 PM)

There are many reasons why a Domme might not want penile penetration or no penetration of any kind and not allow it with her male sub(s), as in your new Mistress' case. (Sorry to hear that, btw. Like Miyani, I would expect to have a fully intimate relationship with my sub, including romance and the full spectrum of sexual relations.)

There are some Dommes who equate "vanilla" (non-BDSM or non-kinky) sex with bottoming. Where they got this notion - given that BDSM bottoming/receiving and BDSM Topping/giving are emphatically NOT vanilla, and may not involve sexual contact whatsoever - is a whole other subject.
You will find this attitude most often with insecure and/or inexperienced Dominants. Even with some experienced Dommes, they get their sexual satisfaction from being a sadistic Top, although not necessarily a sexual sadist. Not all Dominant women are sadistic either, so I don't want to give you the impression that this goes hand in hand.

In other words, there are Dommes who still feel compelled out of ego insecurity to "prove" their dominance. They will only engage in activities which they deem to be Topping, and have confused Topping with dominance and bottoming with submission. Again, a (fairly controversial) subject in itself, but easy to understand if you just keep in mind that D/s is not the same as BDSM. They get intertwined, but you can have one without the other.
A parallel to this would be the male Dom who won't perform cunnilingus on his partner. I have heard several female subs (and not only female submissives either) say they don't like to receive oral and consider it to be a submissive act on the part of their Master. [8|] Yet if their Master desires to bring them pleasure in a different form, they have no issue with that.
There are also submissives who would lose respect for their Dominant if she or he wanted to bottom, which is not uncommon on occasion, or have them act as a service Top. Never mind that the D/s dynamic itself of authority, power and control has not been altered or changed.

Then there's the humiliation/degradation aspect of this particular no-penetration policy. There is nothing that says any submissive has to consent to having a (sexual) humiliation dynamic with his or her Dominant, btw. Many of us don't. You're entitled to have hard and soft limits of your own.
There are subs who either accept or want to be degraded by a Domme by being told that they don't deserve to have intercourse with her. She may insist he use a dildo gag instead, or be limited to oral worship with or without using an inanimate phallic object.

If a sub is not the primary partner, then he could be prohibited from having sexual relations with his Mistress or else be limited as to what sexual contact is allowed.
For example, there are women married to a vanilla husband (or who are poly) who have a (male) sub on the side. A friend of mine is limited to oral servicing because his long-term Mistress is married, and he is her second. In addition, they play in non-sexual ways.
Another friend of mine was limited to body worship (mainly oral) with his Mistress, whose primary partner was her vanilla boyfriend who was being non-consensually cuckolded in that sense. She did peg him once.
Many subs/slaves have told me that their past D/s relationships consisted of oral worship, receiving ass play (getting spanked and/or pegged), bondage, and using a dildo on their Domme. Sometimes S&M got thrown into that mix, CBT or whatnot. (I'm not counting performing service-related tasks, T&D, wearing a chastity device or cuckolding, because the first two are to be expected and the last two don't apply in many instances.)

Just to throw in a non-kink example, a semi-vanilla boyfriend of mine once had a vanilla girlfriend who didn't want intercourse and only engaged in oral sex. (She also had a number of sexual hang-ups besides that one.)

Not to get into your personal business beyond the scope of your OP or opening post, but you are a spanking bottom. As such, you're already limited to a smaller pool of available Dommes who are spanking Tops (presumably). I am not a spanking Top, so I wouldn't match myself up with a spanking bottom, to give you a personal example. It isn't that I don't or won't do OTK spankings, but it wouldn't be a regular part of our play routine with my partner. (For disciplinary purposes, I wouldn't resort to spankings with a sub who actually enjoyed it. That would defeat the whole purpose of discipline by rewarding him with what brings him pleasure.)

You may have to wait for a Domme at some future point in time who will want the same degree of intimacy that you do where you can become a fully dimensional life partner to her and she to you. Until then, chalk this up to experience gained. [sm=kiss.gif] There are plenty of male subs who want to be owned and to be able to call a Domme their Mistress who have been biding their time patiently for many years.

DreamLady



whitebottomboy -> RE: DF/sm LTR without coitus? (6/7/2015 10:06:50 PM)

For the record, I realized after I could no longer edit my last post that I left out an important "NOT" in the sentence, "But I am curious to learn more about the mindset and hows and whys of dommes who truly do not want traditional coitus intercourse, while still having an active sex life with their significant other, or others in some cases."

But it is clear you at least understood that.

Thank you DreamLady for your excellent reply!

The breadth and depth of it were captured in a relatively small amount of space. As a writer, that was very impressive.

Regardless of my personal situation, I am piqued with curiosity about this topic and how it plays into all the different kind of dynamics you so skillfully explained. So I will continue to seek out more information about this.

And yes, I am amazed at my luck. Thank you.

But I feel I have been waiting for many countless years too, as every peek outside my imagination found no one that made me feel she could really tempt me from that cupboard where I locked up my true orientation since puberty.

There is so much about what I am learning of her that shows me she is centered in a narrow band of the D/s spectrum in combination with outside world attributes that add up to perhaps one of if not the only woman who could do so.

And I have approached her via a different site just when I fit exactly the sort of things she is hoping to explore.

I have since had an educational conversation with said lady since posting this OP.

I have learned more about her situation and certain whys. I think her take on no coitus can be summed up with "Because she wants it that way."

She likes the idea of it - a lot - and wants to go with it, expecting to not want to change that. It also fits into some of what she wants to do in a broader sense of play.

And she also is only interested in people she wants to date in the outside world, without public displays of submission beyond what vanilla men might demonstrate in favor of their vanilla woman, until she is behind closed doors. And although she never intends to be singularly monogamous, she is exclusive in her partner choices while remaining open to favorites taking precedent.

That speaks to my need for privacy but also it certainly appeals to one's sense of possibly going to the head of the class someday.

While you describe the notion of coitus = bottoming as being misconstrued, it does accord with my lifelong disconnect that has kept me away from this path.

For me I could not grok going from a Top/bottom dynamic to traditional intercourse, since the act seems at its very core to be about the male wanting to penetrate the woman of his choosing to its biological conclusion and therefore could never feel entirely like a submissive act, even if she were "on top."

Frankly, this is also all happening when I have reached the age where that instinctual drive toward invading and leaving a deposit in the uterus is not as be-all-end-all as it once was. And as much as younger men cannot grok how that could possibly be a positive thing, it does help make the prospect of any and all male climax being limited to other modes of experience a more acceptable proposition. Even a curiously appealing one, at least for now.

And while I might eventually need that kind of sexual bonding in a relationship, just as I might ultimately need complete 1 to 1 monogamy, right now I am "chuffed" just to find out if my tolerances will graduate to the hairbrush, let alone things like strap-ons or chastity cages, with someone who wants to provide the lessens necessary and who also happens to be someone I am naturally extremely attracted to, from her accent and pitch of her voice to the things that put the extra twinkle in her voice at the prospect of having someone new she is clearly excited about getting alone and compliant.

YIKES!

Lucky or doomed to a fate. It all remains to be seen.









seekingOwnertoo -> RE: DF/sm LTR without coitus? (6/11/2015 7:59:21 PM)

Just to throw in my [sm=2cents.gif] worth ...

Lately, I have been seeing an absolutely gorgeous Black Domme. She herself does not like intercourse in the traditional sense ... as She experiences considerable pain from it.

Instead She loves hot oral ... and trust me ... it is as good as any colitis I have ever experienced. Perhaps even hotter given we relate as a Domme and sub.

Just saying ... this does happen.

BUT IT IS EXTREMELY RARE!

Typically when a Lady is attracted to you, sex in some form is mandatory.







dreamlady -> RE: DF/sm LTR without coitus? (6/11/2015 9:34:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: seekingOwnertoo

BUT IT IS EXTREMELY RARE!

Typically when a Lady is attracted to you, sex in some form is mandatory.

Not to get nitpicky, but I wouldn't say it's mandatory so much as inevitable at some stage.

I'm happy for you and your Lady, but I'm sorry to hear that she is one of those women who experiences pain from copulation, for her sake.

Each woman's approach to her sexual partner is a matter of individual choice, regardless of orientation(s).

I'll throw a few more pennies into the pot to say that the way I see it, if certain acts are UNISEXual in nature, then what would I need a man for?
That doesn't mean this is an option to me, because it isn't. I have lovely friendships with women (and with men as well, but the platonic ones will remain as such).
If all I wanted was oral, then I don't need a man for that.
If all he wanted was oral, then he doesn't need a woman for that either.
If the extent of intercourse centers around dildos and strap-ons, then neither one of us requires us to be the gender that we are, and a vibrator can easily be self-manipulated.
The same goes for anal sex as somebody's - any man's sexual activity of choice. He doesn't need a woman for that in terms of his sexual gratification. Preferential gratification, perhaps, but not in essential terms, so not a desirable condition to my way of thinking.

Color me odd, but I want to be appreciated not only for being a woman, but for being a uniquely irreplaceable one at that in my partner's life. I don't lend out what's important, valued and treasured to me either, btw.
(This isn't any reflection upon you, seekingOwnertoo -- I'm just working off of the snippets of yours that I quoted. [:)] In reverse order.)

I don't think it's rare for a Dominant woman to choose a sub based on physical attraction and sexual chemistry whatsoever. It all depends on what kind of partner she's seeking, his relevance to her in her life, and whether he is confined to playing a limited role. I consider it a cop-out when many submissive men only want to be treated as playthings and nothing else, because that's just being lazy when it comes to the give-and-take of relationships. Incidentally, I used to take my male sub friends' sides on what appeared to be their "settling" for less than what they professed to wanting with their Mistress, until I realized their frustration and dissatisfaction was due to their own shortcomings in doing what it takes to make a full-on partnership commitment with a woman (any woman), and in not being steady boyfriend material, much less eligible to take on the mantle of a primary life partner.

I don't want the man in my life to be limited in the versatile roles I need, want and desire him to fill. He's going nowhere fast if he falls short in the romance dept. To cut to the chase, if a man isn't a good fuck and hasn't acquired an acceptable (to me) level of expertise in that area, then he's not a good-enough lover as far as I'm concerned, and that goes for any man as a potential partner, whether he happens to regard himself as submissive or not.

DreamLady

Edit - inserted word



whitebottomboy -> RE: DF/sm LTR without coitus? (6/12/2015 7:45:29 AM)

"I want to be appreciated not only for being a woman, but for being a uniquely irreplaceable one at that in my partner's life."

That is a lovely way to put it. And while it sounds very much the ideal for the traditional 1 to 1 monogamous relationship in the vanilla world, it in some ways holds even more power in a situation where the woman is not monogamous even if all the subs in her life are, with each feeling about her just as you described.

And for those who do have a significant other, or only other, in D/s or BDSM relationship, then it could go both ways with he being the irreplaceable partner for Her.

I am learning that the woman who may be my tutor, and possible future trainer "likes to date submissive men." So she is primarily only interested in men she can and wants to do things with, like others who date via moves, dining, weekend trips, with long-term potential based as much on that as behind closed doors.

While she may have found the idea of a total novice of interest, I think this particular novice happens to fit a growing desire on her part to experience a more Woman/boy dynamic than she has known with other men.

The inherent sense of taboo about intercourse within such dynamics likely fits well with what appears to be an enjoyment of exploiting and denying, and perhaps holding accountable, the male's natural desire to want that very activity.

I get the feeling she loves to replace his desire for "boing, boing, boing" with her desire for "whap! whap! whap!" And while that so resonates with me on a fantasy level, I know enough to be careful what I wish for.

But that could prove another good fit. MOST of the F/m FLR world I read about is alien to me and often not that intrinsically appealing - until I imagine an "irreplaceable female" in my future seriously loving or getting off on such things. And then it takes on a much greater appeal, even if I do not personally enjoy the specific activity.

While I do not know as of yet the degree and scope of her methods, I am getting the feeling that her complete ban on traditional coitus is a source significant satisfaction for her.

It symbolizes her complete break from the vanilla sex life of her past, perhaps. But from what I glean in conversation, once dating a guy evolves into a real "sexual relationship," her limiting any and all male release to modes different from the one way nature makes males want most, is both a major domme power high for her and an immense sexual turn-on.

But my learning to like what a woman likes could get me in trouble here too. I know that she has considerable experience in "plug training" in preparation for strap-on pegging, which I imagine must really drive home the reality that traditional sexual intercourse is not only forbidden and denied, it is supplanted with role reversal intercourse to further intensify the "No coitus for you!" impact - for him and for Her.

But I am a LONG way from anything of that sort! And we have no idea if this will lead anywhere beyond a domme helping a novice experience his first traditional CP sessions. I will confess, however, to already being inspired by the notion of winning her attentions to the point she actually wants to start "dating."



LovelyLavender15 -> RE: DF/sm LTR without coitus? (7/20/2015 9:50:45 PM)

A domme will usually refrain from intercourse in the beginning as a way to control her sub. She will have him please her sexually in other ways.



MiaCastle -> RE: DF/sm LTR without coitus? (7/20/2015 10:48:50 PM)

I've never heard that. That sounds like a personal take on how to control a submissive and I'm not sure that is beneficial to tell submissive men that is usual. They might get themselves into trouble assuming that you as a dom was telling them the truth about dominant women. For me, sex is not a tool used for manipulation. I can entice without manipulation and control in my opinion is found in the brain and will. I will not use my sexuality to manipulate for control. I will entice and he will desire me, but give me satisfaction in the beginning to control him sounds more like a game than control or pleasure.

If we can't do it with our minds, no one is touching my goodies. I am more than a body and I expect my submissives to be more responsive and see the benefit of my control and pleasing me in more than a sexual manner. It isn't all about the sex, though sex is important. If sex is how to control a man, I would not want that man. I do not amount to sex only or mostly. Sex and kink is an enhancement of something more solid between us that will be the strength of our relationship. I do not wish to be a hot flash in a life, but an enduring love that encompasses far more than sexual enticement.

Share the pussy for control? I'd rather go feed a monkey. I want a man. Not someone that cannot see the worth in submission unless that submission is based on sexual games. When I want to have sex, it should not be determined by what stage we are at in his learning to be controlled. The thought of that is disgusting to me. I am more than a sexual tool to be used and dished out to evoke a certain response.



NookieNotes -> RE: DF/sm LTR without coitus? (7/21/2015 3:09:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LovelyLavender15

A domme will usually refrain from intercourse in the beginning as a way to control her sub. She will have him please her sexually in other ways.


A domme may refrain from intercourse in the beginning as a way to control her sub. She will have him please her sexually in other ways.

There, fixed it for you. Keep in mind when you post that you are posting a POV, and a limited one at that. Better to speak from a place of personal preference than to blanket statement.

When I refrain from intercourse, it's because I don't want it yet. Not because I am trying to control my sub.

In fact, I don't "control" my subs at all. I simply lead, and they are inspired to follow. I give them a task, they want to complete it. Because they follow me. Because they believe I have earned the right.

If I want sex, I get it. If I want PIV, I get it. If I don't, I don't.

Because I am the dominant. Seems simple.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.445313E-02