RE: "No Tie = No Service" (Full Version)

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



Message

darkinshadows -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/16/2004 5:53:05 PM)

m'Lady Whipenrod...

Thank You for allowing Angel to reply.

IMO... It comes down to commen sense and a willingness to serve.

If a sub/slave is meeting a Dominant for the first time, of course there should be no expectations of submission immediately. It would be unwise. He has offered to take m'Lady to dinner... it is obvious He is offering to serve in such a way. He has taken the time and trouble to realise the best restaurent would be a way to honour... His thoughtfulness is evident...

Maybe He was nervous? Possibly... however if he is to honour a Dominia in the ways He first thought then He should be aware that a half hearted effort makes all that he has offered, null and void.

Being in a business meeting all day is irrelevant. If His tie is missing, and it is remarked upon, AND He still feels the desire to serve the Dominia, then His commen sense should speak to Him, and ultimately His desire to serve, so He could ask if m'Lady would wish Him to wear such. A submissive/slave who is desiring to serve should be constantly aware of the Dominants questions, and take cues from such, just as a Dominant would to a sub/slave.

If I had done something to displease a Dominant, then I would be thankful if it was mentioned, so that I may not repeat the mistake. I would apologise for my lack of knowledge and be grateful that the Dominant took the time to explain such to teach me more. However, commen sense and the need to please my chosen Dominant should keep me, as a submissive/slave 'on my toes'.

I do understand that mind reading is not a gift that all have. But telepathy is not the point, empathy and ettiqette is.

(This is only a humble opinion... we all make mistakes... its whether we learn from them that counts)



GoddessJules -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/16/2004 6:41:43 PM)

Dark angel,

Bravo. I think you hit the nail on the head with:
quote:

He should be aware that a half hearted effort makes all that he has offered, null and void.

quote:

A submissive/slave who is desiring to serve should be constantly aware of the Dominants questions, and take cues from such

quote:

commen sense and the need to please my chosen Dominant should keep me, as a submissive/slave 'on my toes'



Thank you for brightening my evening. I find your spirit uplifting.

Jules



Moleculor -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/17/2004 10:20:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dark~angel

He should be aware that a half hearted effort makes all that he has offered, null and void.


It's a fscking TIE, for deity's sake! What's up with requiring absolute perfection these days? No one is perfect! This isn't him giving a half-hearted attempt at something she COMMANDED, this is him being well within the dress code of the place in question, and well within the expectations Whipenrod had given! Certainly she would have been well within her right to say "Go put the tie back on" (and he would have been within his rights to say "We have no negotiated power exchange yet, so you can keep your bloody commandments to yourself," but then again that's really only something it seems female submissives have the right to do.) And if someone's going to make that much of a big deal about a tie, then make it then and there where it can be corrected, rather than coming back here and asking for everyone's opinions so you can have a reason to never see the guy again (over a fscking TIE). If it was that big of a deal, then the NEXT time you meet, make your expectations CLEAR.

Seriously, is everyone just looking for a reason to blow this guy off? I'd suggest finding a better one than a tie, for fuck's sake!



GoddessJules -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/17/2004 10:39:14 AM)

quote:

What's up with requiring absolute perfection these days?


Actually, the passage you quoted came from someone identifying as being submissive. So it isn't only that dominant people hold high standards. . .some submissive people hold themselves to a high standard as well. For those people who are half asses and/or accept half assed efforts. . .more power to them. I'm all about what makes people happy. For those that expect a something a little bit more. . .even more power to them [;)]

Jules



darkinshadows -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/17/2004 10:59:36 AM)

quote:

It's a fscking TIE, for deity's sake! What's up with requiring absolute perfection these days? No one is perfect!


Nobody is perfect... which is why m'Lady Jules is so stunning!...(cheesy grin)

But to agree, perfection isnt required... not in first meetings... however commen sense is.

quote:

(and he would have been within his rights to say "We have no negotiated power exchange yet, so you can keep your bloody commandments to yourself," but then again that's really only something it seems female submissives have the right to do.)


Any submissive or slave has the right to say no, regardless of age, gender or sexual orientation...(rmes)

quote:

Seriously, is everyone just looking for a reason to blow this guy off?


Whether the sub is male or female is irrelevant. Angel responded about a submissive.

Oh, and no need to get so excited, seriously about a tie, Mr Moleculor. It isnt about a tie, its about a submissive who was eager to please and show His service...



BeachMystress -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/17/2004 1:06:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dark~angel

But to agree, perfection isnt required... not in first meetings... however commen sense is.[/center]
.......... It isnt about a tie, its about a submissive who was eager to please and show His service...[/center]



Angel, were you ever new to this lifestyle? Lots of male subs have never had the opportunity to serve. They do not have TRAINING. They have never had someone guide them and show them that everything a Dominant says is given equal weight. Society and maternal instinct teach women how to please. Men do not have that advantage. They WANT to please, but have to be shown how. Do not equate yourself with a male sub ever. You are a totally different creature. Mother nature programmed male and female for different roles. We have different psychology and physiology. A femsub is not the equivalent of a msub. I'm not saying that either type of sub is superior to the other. I'm saying you're different. What is common sense to you is not to the msub. They need to be guided.

Now, the role of a Dominant as I understand it, is to train their sub in how to please them. I never consider a sub who first comes to me as being trained, no matter how many other Domme they've served or for what period of time. They know how someone else likes things.. not ME. Some are easier to train than others, because someone has put the time into making them understand that anything the Dominant wants is to be provided. I do not expect any of them to be a mind reader. If something is important to me, I make SURE they know it. I do not sit there and fume because something that was important to me wasn't done. That would be a failing in ME, not the sub. I had missed an opportunity to train.



Solaise -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/17/2004 3:41:49 PM)

quote:

Now, the role of a Dominant as I understand it, is to train their sub in how to please them. I never consider a sub who first comes to me as being trained, no matter how many other Domme they've served or for what period of time. They know how someone else likes things.. not ME. Some are easier to train than others, because someone has put the time into making them understand that anything the Dominant wants is to be provided. I do not expect any of them to be a mind reader. If something is important to me, I make SURE they know it. I do not sit there and fume because something that was important to me wasn't done. That would be a failing in ME, not the sub. I had missed an opportunity to train.


I read the OP in the wee hours of the morning, and misread it. I thought the sub was already hers.

I have to agree with this statement. He has to be given the guidelines first. If no dress code was given, he can't really be taken to task for breaking a dress code that was nonexistent. It seems like a set up for failure to have these kinds of unstated expectations.



Moleculor -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/17/2004 7:18:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessJules

quote:

What's up with requiring absolute perfection these days?


Actually, the passage you quoted came from someone identifying as being submissive. So it isn't only that dominant people hold high standards. . .some submissive people hold themselves to a high standard as well. For those people who are half asses and/or accept half assed efforts. . .more power to them. I'm all about what makes people happy. For those that expect a something a little bit more. . .even more power to them [;)]

Jules


But to have such expectations is to live in a fantasy world. A gorean might as well expect every female to bow (or whatever the fuxx0r they do) to them IRL. That's -fantasy-. In the REAL world, people are not mind readers, and do not conform to your every thought and whim the very first time they meet you.



subdreams1955 -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/18/2004 8:30:36 AM)

Personally, I would never wear a suit without a tie - especially if I was trying to impress someone.

That's my submissive thought,
d.



wyngedbyste -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/18/2004 10:12:44 AM)

Unspoken expectations are what derail most relationships. Expecting someone to read your mind is setting them (and you) up for failure.

If I wanted a potential partner to wear a suit and tie to take me to dinner, I'd request that he do so. Realistically, however, until an agreement is reached that we have a relationship, he would be within his rights to wear whatever he wanted. Besides which...if he's buying....I'd think he has a right to be comfortable. In this situation, I would have been the one buying the dinner. And, in that case, I'd require a suit and tie.

I try to be conscious of where my power begins and ends. But that's me.

Byste



Chiron -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/18/2004 1:15:17 PM)

Dear Whipenrod,

This post really made me laugh! A lot of people with much more experience than me have taken the post seriously, though and through their comments the follwoing thoughts came to mind.

This sub was probably looking forward to meeting you for an awful long time, Ma'am and in removing his tie was differentiating that part of his day from what went before. It's what men do. Here are two people exploring the possibility of stepping outside of the bounds of everyday society, along with all it's hypocritical and limiting mores and what strikes you is that he isn't wearing a tie?!

(Incidentally, you might study feminist theory on the meaning of the tie in relation to the position of men and women in society, based on historical antecedents. Suffice to say, you could equally legitimately be offended by its presence!)

As many have pointed out; you did not indicate to him the necessity of wearing formal dress in advance or draw his attention to your displeasure at the time. If he detected your chagrin, he was wise NOT to run to the car park to fetch this outmoded piece of patriarchal neckwear. That would only have drawn undue attention to you both and -depending on your sensitivity to your surroundings - possibly ruined your whole evening.

An anecdote here: I took a perfectly charming young lady to dinner one night, in not too dissimilar circumstances. I'm from a very humble background but luckily, through good fortune have met and befriended those from much 'grander' ones. So when this young lady discovered the urge to light a cigarette mid-meal, drawing hilarity and approbation from the snobs seated around us, she looked embarassed - so rather than 'putting her right' or seething with embarassment myself, I lit one, too.

It made more sense to forge a link between myself and someone I was interested in, than to follow the herd. If she had picked up the wrong fork, I would have done the same; knowing when to break the rules is a mark of real quality.

Anyway, you've let us all know the kind of restaurants that matter to you[;)] but I really think you should be concentrating on more than just the externals. Never mind society's rules, will he adhere to yours?




Chiron -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/18/2004 1:17:28 PM)

Dear Whipenrod,

a postscript: If you are wondering whether your 'leniency' suggests you can be bought, you've answered your own question.



darkinshadows -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/18/2004 1:44:57 PM)

quote:

Society and maternal instinct teach women how to please. Men do not have that advantage. They WANT to please, but have to be shown how. Do not equate yourself with a male sub ever. You are a totally different creature.


Indeed... Angel would never equate herself with a male submissive. Angel would never equate herself with any submissive... male/female/slave/pet/... whatever their orientation, because each person is different.

However, as I read the initial question, this 'person' took a Dominia to a wonderful restaurant...a 'special restaurent'... one he chose ... a place of opulance. He discussed His eagarness to 'serve'... and He visits the opera(so He knows how to dress)... therefore He tried to 'impress'... but it was a half hearted effort. It isnt about being 'perfect'... it isnt about being 'new'... it is about commen sense... and about listening.

If a man takes out a lady to an opulant restaurent with the aim to impress&serve, be they Dom(and yes Doms can and do serve)/sub/slave or other, unless they have totally no concept of manners, romance or commen sense... they would have dressed correctly. I have never stated that I felt that the Dominant should not express their desire. But equally, this question is about a non commitment relationship... and in all seriousness if I was a submissive on the search for a Dominant and He had acted in such a way(dressed inappropriately), I doubt I would even consider continuing to a second meeting. Its a personal preference, no more no less. I prefere someone who can think for themself and show a little self worth and commen sense.


Not having a tie because of work?... then don't come to such a place after work.



quote:

An anecdote here: I took a perfectly charming young lady to dinner one night, in not too dissimilar circumstances. I'm from a very humble background but luckily, through good fortune have met and befriended those from much 'grander' ones. So when this young lady discovered the urge to light a cigarette mid-meal, drawing hilarity and approbation from the snobs seated around us, she looked embarassed


Make a 'faux pas' at a restaurent?... so what... the only person who matters is the one you are with. Who cares what others think? Ettiquete and commen sense have absolutely nothing to do with snobbery.
quote:

so rather than 'putting her right' or seething with embarassment myself, I lit one, too.


So, instead of informing her and protecting her, you allowed her to be ridiculed and forget the training? A submissive and a slave yearn to learn... to better themself for their Master and to please Him. I would feel little respect for someone who just allowed me to fail instead of informing why I had, how I had and what I could do to improve.



perverseangelic -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/18/2004 2:05:10 PM)

I asked my partner what he thought about this one, as I was curious about the perspective of a male and a dominant person.

He said that he believes in this case the potential power dynamic has nothing to do with the situation. The man in question simply didn't put go to the degree of formality in his personal experience that would have swept the woman off her feet.(so to speak).

My partner said that were he meeting a woman of -any- orientation, and his goal was to impress her, he'd make sure he was dressed to the degree which the situation mandated. That is, you wear a tie if you're taking her to a resteraunt for which a tie would be appropriate. If you don't want to dress to that degree, you take her somewhere where slacks and a polo are appropriate. My partner said, too, that he'd probably tend to overdress, as that's more likely to make a favorable impression.

I guess I saw this as a bit harsh on the part of the OP, but not unresonable. She just wasn't impressed by the man. She hadn't told him spesifically how to dress, so I believe that refusing to see him again -would- be harsh.

I don't understand why he didn't dress to the occation. If he needed to relax after work he should have either picked a different venue for dinner, or a different night when he could dress to impress her.



warlock4821 -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/18/2004 3:46:10 PM)


After reading the corrrespondance from many individuals regarding this topic, I thought it appropriate to the discussion to give some overlooked, or not mentioned facts so that those interested in making a opinion would have all the facts requisite to make a germain comment.

I am the subject "No Tie= No Service", submissive described in this topic.

I think a more detailed account of the events leading up to this incident would be appropriate.

After e-mails were exchanged and a telephone conversation, it was decided that a meeting would be appropriate. A mutually agreed upon time was established. Mistress requested that I select a location to meet over drinks. I suggested three locations that I was aware of that I thought would be convenient to Mistress. Two of the locations are similar in level of ambience and the third a location I was not personnaly familiar with, but had heard good reviews about. Mistress' response to the two similiar venues owned by the same proprietors, and I quote verbatum, " I usually suggest less opulent places", which of course is fine to me. Mistress further suggested a rather casual establishment which most patrons attend in jeans and sneakers, and another establishment upscale, although not to the level of the two I suggested but rather nice which I was not sure I had been to before. We settled on this last venue.

With the plan in mind of meeting at this venue, I decided to wear something I thought appropriate for the location. Had we gone to either of the two places I suggested, I would have worn a suit with a tie, although the policy of both establishments is jackets required, tie optional. Based on Mistress' suggestion of a more casual place, I thought it prudent to wear something more toned down. Despite the comments made in the forum, I did not wear a suit. I wore navy blue wool and cashmere slacks, a professionally laundered white cotton button down collared shirt, silk underwear, and a silk and wool cream, blue and gold glenn plaid sports jacket.

When we met at the place we had agreed upon, we found that the establishment was closed. We discussed alternates and Mistress suggested we go to the "opulant" establishment that I had originally suggested by Mistress rejected. We did and I thought had a marvelous evening. The food was extremely good, the wine well suited to the meal and the conversation stimulating.

Additional points that I would like to make to further the discussion:

- The business meetings mentioned were internal meetings that I held with my staff in our headquarters. They were "working session" meetings to develope year end financial statements, sales forecasts for the coming year and manufacturing backlogs. That is the reason for my not wearing a tie.

- There was no tie in my car for me to put on. I do not use any of my cars as a closet.

- There were no previous discussions, whether by e-mail or phone of standards of dress or more specifally, about the dress code for our meeting. I must say however, that Mistress was dressed in an absolutely stunning manner whereby what she wore merely enhanced her natural beauty. I was proud to be in her presence.

- I had no idea when Mistress made note of my lack of tie the level of her displeasure. Although I do not believe that I, given the events of the evening, did anything in-appropriate. The fact does remain that I have displeased Mistress, and given any consideration on her part, to see her again, I will make every effort to atone for causing her any discomfort.

Lastly, in keeping with the meaning of this forum, I have some questions to pose to all Mistresses and anyone else that has any insight to my queries:

1- Is it common place for a Mistress to find fault with a submissive, even if it is pardon me for saying, possibly "trumped up" to reinforce her superiority?

2- Or was this merely an act to establish a tone for future meetings?

3- Or are rules made up as relationships develope, and punishment administered whether the potental infraction was discussed previously?



BeachMystress -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/18/2004 4:14:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dark~angel



However, as I read the initial question, this 'person' took a Dominia to a wonderful restaurant...a 'special restaurent'... one he chose ... a place of opulance. He discussed His eagarness to 'serve'...

Yes he did. He put a lot of time and effort into the dinner. He didn't wear a TIE. It hadn't been listed as a requirement. He was having what should have been a wonderful relaxing dinner with a special woman. Instead of living up to being the special woman, she sat and fumed all night over something that could have been fixed with a single sentence.. and you feel he was to blame?!?!

quote:

ORIGINAL: dark~angel
and He visits the opera(so He knows how to dress)...

One moment here.. I've seen people at the opera in jeans. Do not ASSUME the events one attends means they know a thing about fashion, manners or dressing. That is a rather bigoted impression. It means he has been to the opera, no more, no less.
quote:

ORIGINAL: dark~angel
therefore He tried to 'impress'... but it was a half hearted effort. It isnt about being 'perfect'... it isnt about being 'new'... it is about commen sense... and about listening.

And who made you the arbitrator of common sense? I think it is pretty much common sense to not expect a person to mind read. I think it is common sense for the woman to SAY what she wants. I hate to say that in my book, you're showing a lack of common sense by expecting someone new to know the rules of the game without being told.

And how is it not about being new? If the man had training, he'd have known what to do. In any case, let me put this in a way you can understand better. You have this Dom who wants to take you to the best restaurant in town. You get your hair done, you spend hours on your make up. You go all out. You meet him. He says, oh.. no necklace as you'd chosen not to wear one with your outfit. Do you take this as a signal that you must go procure a necklace? Is he pleased or unhappy that you're not wearing one? He doesn't say anything else. It seemed a passing observation. You don't think more about it.. after all, it is only neckwear. You have a wonderful dinner. The conversation was excellent. You had lots in common with the man. You think the evening has been a perfect success! You get home glowing with happiness and write a wonderful thank you letter to the Dom, only to find out that he fumed all night that you didn't have on a necklace. He felt that you should have known to honor him with such; that you should have known his offhanded comment meant he was displeased. How would you feel about this? I'm sure you'd feel awful. Here was something that mattered to someone you would love to be with, and it was ruined over something easy to fix that you'd not been given the chance to correct.
quote:

ORIGINAL: dark~angel
If a man takes out a lady to an opulant restaurent with the aim to impress&serve, be they Dom(and yes Doms can and do serve)/sub/slave or other, unless they have totally no concept of manners, romance or commen sense... they would have dressed correctly.

He was dressed correctly. He was well within dress codes of an opulent restaurant or they'd have denied service. The best restaurants do that, you know. He was missing an accessory.

And since he was not told how to dress, he did the best he could. The tie meant nothing to him but something that had been hurting him all day. Personally, under the circumstance, I'd have been upset if he'd have felt constrained to wear a tie with me. I might have mentioned the lack of tie, but when told why, would never have expected him to put it back on. If I felt the evening needed it. I'd have said so. While I do find ties appealing on a man, one who has been wearing one all day should be out of it. Current medical research indicates neckties may increase the risk of glaucoma by boosting blood pressure inside the eyes to dangerous levels. (Specifically, a tight necktie constricts neck veins and raises the pressure in the eyes.) The man did not belch, fart, eat with the wrong utensil. He did not use offensive language. He was a delightful dinner companion. I'd have personally been offended if he'd have gotten the tie. It would have said to me he felt I was so shallow as to need something so trivial to be pleased.


quote:


if I was a submissive on the search for a Dominant and He had acted in such a way(dressed inappropriately), I doubt I would even consider continuing to a second meeting.

You'd rather a Dom suffered to please you rather than taking his ease? *raised eyebrow*
quote:


Its a personal preference, no more no less. I prefere someone who can think for themself and show a little self worth and commen sense

While it is a personal preference and the Domme in question is well within her rights to pass him up for whatever reasons she had, I think the man showed wonderful respect and self worth. He took the woman to one of the "best" places in town. Here that would equal dropping about $300 for dinner. That is a hell of a lot of respect. You do not take people you don't respect to something that is going to cost you a lot. You take them to Denny's. I actually hope that she does turn him down as a submissive. From her original post, this man deserves a lot more than he has been given.



BeachMystress -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/18/2004 4:35:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: warlock4821

Lastly, in keeping with the meaning of this forum, I have some questions to pose to all Mistresses and anyone else that has any insight to my queries:

1- Is it common place for a Mistress to find fault with a submissive, even if it is pardon me for saying, possibly "trumped up" to reinforce her superiority?

2- Or was this merely an act to establish a tone for future meetings?

3- Or are rules made up as relationships develope, and punishment administered whether the potental infraction was discussed previously?


1) Some find they like that sort of interaction with a submissive. They find that keeping the sub in a state of terror or having a "reason" to punish is great fun. They feel it is part of the "mind fuck" and go out of their way to create situations that their sub will fail in completing. I will not say it is common, since in all the Domme I've met, only one of them treated her sub in such a way. Most of the Domme I associate with treat their subs as valued companions.

2) That is a possibility. Is she the type of person who would do such a thing?

3) This ends up being however the Domme wants. Some hand you a list of rules up front. Some verbally give rules and expect you to remember them. Some expect you to just "know" what you should do.

My approach is that I have four common rules. First, my submissive will be respectful of me at all times. Second, my sub will not bring shame upon himself or me via his actions, inactions or language. Third, that I be the only main female in his life. Fourth, that I am the only person to whom he submits. If we are in public or at a function he needs to be courteous to all, but accept true orders only from me or from those I tell him to obey. Other than that, a rule is added only if it becomes necessary. That has only ever happened a few times.



warlock4821 -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/18/2004 5:13:54 PM)

Mistress:

Thank you for reading my message and in responding to my questios. I have one other I am rather curious about;

-Does a Mistress prefer a submissive that follows the directions and rules of his Mistress with merely the threat of punishment or falling into disfavor with his Mistress, or does the Mistress hope that her submissive mis-steps thereby provoking the punishment from the Mistress? In other words, does a Mistress derive pleasure from adherence to the rules or by the infliction of punishment? Perhaps the answer is that it varies from Mistress to Mistress.



EStrict -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/18/2004 5:55:19 PM)

I am glad you posted. I will change part of my original response. I said originally that both of you were to blame (you for not doing anything about the tie when she asked, her for not saying things more explicitly when setting things up). If the OP chose a casual place, then you were definitely dressed above average for a jeans king of place, thus were making every effort to *impress*.

The problem seems more one of poor communication on the part of the female dominant. She did not specify requirements of hers (especially ones that are not logic considering the chosen venue), did not let you know clearly she was displeased (since you do not know until you read this), and finally, she posted in a manner that did not reflect the true facts in what could appear an effort to make it seem as if the blame was yours rather than dealing with the fact she was showing poor communication skills throughout.

Now, that being said, here is another question. Why was the place closed? Was it a day/time they were always closed or was it closed for a reason you would have no way of knowing about when you *found* it for her? If it was your responsibility to find some where, it was also your responsibility to verify hours of operation.



Moleculor -> RE: "No Tie = No Service" (12/18/2004 6:00:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dark~angel

However, as I read the initial question, this 'person' took a Dominia to a wonderful restaurant...a 'special restaurent'... one he chose ... a place of opulance. He discussed His eagarness to 'serve'... and He visits the opera(so He knows how to dress)... therefore He tried to 'impress'... but it was a half hearted effort. It isnt about being 'perfect'... it isnt about being 'new'... it is about commen sense... and about listening.


This isn't internet D/s where everything is perfect every time. Things happen. Problems come up. People don't conform to your standards every time. If things are forgotten, you can't pull them out of thin air. He went through what seems like an insane amount of trouble to get even a FIRST date (guess this is why I'd never be a successful sub... any woman who requires absolute perfection every time isn't WORTH my time), and a tie rates quite possibly LAST on the list of Important Things To Do.

Also a "desire to serve" does not instantly translate into "I am your slave now, please, command me to kneel and suck the s*** out of your ass!" He is not, by any standard (except maybe feminazi-ism) required to obey her commands or even whims. Certainly, it'll help in impressing her, but g'damn there's a limit to what you should have to do on a FRELLING FIRST DATE before it becomes outright stupid.

In addition, I'd just like to point out the fact that the gentleman in question has responded to this thread and... whadya know... you, lady, are wrong. :) We not only didn't have all the facts, there was no WAY he could have been expected to have a tie, since the Domme in question actually wanted something LESS OPULANT.

Out here in the -real- world, things are rarely perfect.

You also might want to read on to the next part of my post, where I blow any chance of there ever being "perfection" completely out of the water. Maybe a little reality check will do you and a few others in this thread some good.

quote:

ORIGINAL: warlock4821

With the plan in mind of meeting at this venue, I decided to wear something I thought appropriate for the location. Had we gone to either of the two places I suggested, I would have worn a suit with a tie, although the policy of both establishments is jackets required, tie optional. Based on Mistress' suggestion of a more casual place, I thought it prudent to wear something more toned down. Despite the comments made in the forum, I did not wear a suit. I wore navy blue wool and cashmere slacks, a professionally laundered white cotton button down collared shirt, silk underwear, and a silk and wool cream, blue and gold glenn plaid sports jacket.

When we met at the place we had agreed upon, we found that the establishment was closed. We discussed alternates and Mistress suggested we go to the "opulant" establishment that I had originally suggested by Mistress rejected. We did and I thought had a marvelous evening. The food was extremely good, the wine well suited to the meal and the conversation stimulating.


She said she prefered less opulant places. She suggested a place less opulant. Said place turned out to be closed. She then suggested that you go to a MORE opulant place.

  • She expected you to be prepared for a place that, by all indications, she had no interest in going to? (i.e. a tie for a place that she had already shot down for being too opulant and by suggesting an alternative, less opulant place) Talk about sending mixed signals! She says "No, I don't like opulant places, but hey, this less fancy place is closed so lets go to that really fancy place you suggested anyway. Where the hell is your tie?"
  • If she suggested the place that was closed... wouldn't she have had an idea of the hours of operation? I suppose with it being something close to the holidays it's possible that the place was closed for a special occasion, but I doubt it, since the holidays tend to be high-traffic seasons for everyone. And why'd she suggest the more opulant place after stating she liked things less formal? Is it possible that this was some sort of "test" or some crap like that? I suppose it's possible that she took into account how you were both dressed and where each of you would fit in best at, but something smells fishy here.



    • Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

    Valid CSS!




    Collarchat.com © 2025
    Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
    4.785156E-02