RE: OMG You did what?!?!?!

RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (Full Version)

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

Message

Wildfleurs -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/26/2007 7:01:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub That depends. I thought we were talking about past experience which means that he would no longer be owned and therefore there would no concern about his mistress/master trying to have authority over you. Nope, her original question was both about previous experience and also current tendencies. The last sentence of the OP is: quote: AND to add an extra kink in the chain.....what if you found out they still had switch tendencies and had not told you about it? C~

krikket -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/26/2007 7:11:10 PM)
Truth and honesty are biggies in my book, and lies of omissions are lies nonetheless. While i wouldn't be stressed by his earlier explorations, i would wonder what else he had "neglected" to tell me about. End of story? Who know, but End of relationship -- you betcha.. cheers krikket PS i've always loved that song..lol quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse Okay, based upon another thread in another zone. I am asking a question. To all the submissives and slaves (why did I just hear a Julio Iglesias song in my head....to all the girls I've loved befoooooorrrrrrre.....)anyway back to the topic at hand. What would you do/think/say IF you found out that your dominant/master/mistress had neglected to inform you that they had been submissive/slave in the past? Would it matter if it was more of a scene/bottoming thing versus a relationship? Why? Or, would you view it as a learning experience? AND to add an extra kink in the chain.....what if you found out they still had switch tendencies and had not told you about it?

psykocloud -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/26/2007 7:17:31 PM)
It would not matter to me if that is his past. But if he still has switch tendencies, No way could I submit to him, nor would I want to. psyko

AquaticSub -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/26/2007 7:25:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub That depends. I thought we were talking about past experience which means that he would no longer be owned and therefore there would no concern about his mistress/master trying to have authority over you. Nope, her original question was both about previous experience and also current tendencies. The last sentence of the OP is: quote: AND to add an extra kink in the chain.....what if you found out they still had switch tendencies and had not told you about it? C~ Having switch tendencies doesn't mean you will be owned though. You can get topped at a play party to help "Get your fix" or just ignore it all together. I assume it's rather like being bisexual. Yes it's all very nice but you don't have to have both when you have one. So, does it matter to you if they are pure dom but submitted in the past?

juliaoceania -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/26/2007 7:31:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross quote: ORIGINAL: toservez This would include a switch who grows tired of being dominate, someone confused which role they want or if they need at all and someone just playing the roles like an actor. Uh, is this what you think all switches are about? The majority of switches I know actually do NOT switch within ONE relationship- they simply form multiple relationships, some as the dominant, some as the submissive. I know a slave who is property to her master- that is universal and unchanging. But she also dominates other in relationships. I understand if someone being a switch or previously submissive squicks you out and is one of your weird buttons (we all have them), but don't suggest that all switches are just tired, confused or playing a role. That was why I answered the way I did. If he had switchy feelings at times that he had acted on in the past, but was related to me in a completely dominant manner, then why should I care? My understandings of many switches is that they do not switch with the same partner always. In some people the driving force toward orientation is the partner, not the action was my understanding... although I am sure everyone is different.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/26/2007 7:33:44 PM)
Yeah I actually even confused a lot of switches by being involved with switches. Sigh, I REALLY don't intend to do that all the time, really.

Missokyst -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/26/2007 8:20:26 PM)
It wouldnt bother me in the least. It wouldn't change MY experience with him. What he had done in the past is past. Much like my past is my past. I don't expect anyone out there to be mr perfect born to be a dominant and has never considered anything else. I came to be who I am as a result of my life experience. And if the man to whom I am submitting has also lived a life full of experience then it must mean he is also human. If I submitted before I found out, there is no reason to make me change my mind once I did find out. To do less would dismiss what I already know about the man (or woman). I have better judgement than that. Kyst quote: ORIGINAL: LaTigresse IF you found out that your dominant/master/mistress had neglected to inform you that they had been submissive/slave in the past?

Wildfleurs -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/26/2007 8:41:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub Having switch tendencies doesn't mean you will be owned though. You can get topped at a play party to help "Get your fix" or just ignore it all together. I assume it's rather like being bisexual. Yes it's all very nice but you don't have to have both when you have one. But conversely, it can mean that you will be owned - I know plenty of owned switches and I also know plenty of sadomasochistic switches. It really does run the gamut. quote: So, does it matter to you if they are pure dom but submitted in the past? It depends - if my owner did it in some misguided concept that it would help him become a better dominant but he didn't enjoy it then it wouldn't matter much to me though I'd wonder a little bit about his ability to not fall into "party line thinking." If my owner did it because he thought it would help him become a better dominant and enjoyed submitting then I'd prolly want to know if he was still a switch and if he wasn't still a switch what exactly changed for him that he no longer had those tendencies. As I mentioned before I'd also wonder why it took him nine years to mention this all to me. If he submitted in the past because he wanted to and enjoyed it then similarly we'd have to have a disucssion about whether he still had switch tendencies and whether he wanted to pursue submission going towards the future. For the reasons I outlined before (his time, tangible objects, intangible objects, sexuality, etc no longer being under his authority but under someone elses) if he wanted to pursue submission in the future I'd probably with a huge amount of difficultly ask for release. I'd ask for release because beyond those practical things about him being under someone elses authority given that we've been together for a significant amount of time and he never ever mentioned it before would be a serious trust issue and also would mean that many things that he told me and many of the philosophies he has are just flat out lies. C~

hispossession -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/26/2007 9:47:51 PM)
very early on in our relationship Master informed me that he had been, for all intents and purposes, submissive to another man. Not sexually from my understanding but in every other way. This man took care of him when he needed guidance and in return my Master served him. He still speaks fondly of that time... he cherished it for many reasons and is still close with the man. There is, of course, more to the story... but I digress... this thread made me think about my reaction to finding this information out... it simply made sense. The way he spoke of his Dom is the same way I speak of him. He learned from his Dom the way that I have learned from him... however it came to be doesn't matter... my Master is one of the most amazing men I've ever met and he came to be the man he is by his experiences and choices... so although I have a hard time picturing one of the most Dominant men I have ever met submitting, in any way, to anyone... it doesn't matter. He did. If nothing else it gives him some insight into my position that he wouldn't likely have had without that experience.

dawntreader -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/26/2007 10:16:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross I'd be completely concerned about WHY they hadn't been able to tell me this. I wouldn't care at all about the actual thing. I have a relationship with them now, this is who they are, that's what matters. I don't care if they were kept in a basement by an entire sorority house through college. It's the betrayal and the lies which would upset me and affect the relationship. i would agree...the betrayal and lies, otherwise not an issue. LaTigresse, i like your example of the Dom who started out serving....i think anytime we can experience what another does we gain greater appreciation for them and what they do :-)

juliaoceania -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/26/2007 11:06:11 PM)
FR A couple of years ago I talked with a very nice and successful gentleman who was active in the lifestyle 25 years ago and left it to get married. The marriage did not work out, partially because he was a dominant man who felt he should be marry vanilla. So anyways he told me that he had served a mistress for about a year, he thought it taught him invaluable things that he could learn no other way... one of which was that he is NOT sub and could never be fulfilled by that orientation. But he was glad for the experience. He was not shy about sharing that with me whatsoever. If it had not been for reuniting with my former dominant I would have wanted to meet this other, his submissive past was not even an eye blink for me

adaddysgirl -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/27/2007 12:06:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GeekyGirl If I found out a man had submissive tendencies, it would be a huge turn off for me (I ended a relationship over something similiar). No offense to the male sub/Fem domme people out there (to each their own) but I find something really "squick-ish" about men subbing to women and it would sort of freak me out. I dated a guy for two years (it wasn''t exactly a vanilla relationship but we weren't full time dom/sub either). For the first year and a half, he was always the dominant sex partner (the one tying me up and spanking me etc). Suddenly he tells me he's bi and he wants me to tie him up and do him with a strap-on and stuff...I tried it about 3 times and I was done. It sort of turned my stomach honestly. The relationship ended shortly after for a variety of reasons. I just have a hard time feeling attracted to a man who is anything less than 100% dominant. i had a similar situation and i ended up feeling this same way. i am a firm believer that everyone should do what fulfills them, floats their boat, makes them happy, whatever.....just as i believe that for myself as well....and i just plain have no interest in sub males, bottoms, switches nor bis. And i would not even be interested in a maso dom as i am not sadistic in any way. Sure cuts down on my 'available pool' doesn't it? lol DG

agirl -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/27/2007 4:53:48 AM)
I wouldn't consider not knowing something like this as lying, nor would I consider it a betrayal of any kind. I don't have an automatic right to know everything about him. It's entirely up to him what he reveals, or doesn't. How we relate to each other isn't based on what he might have been/done nor on what he might be/or do, it's based on what we ARE to each other. It's important that he knows much more about me, as he needs extensive information to guide, control and direct, to do his job well. I need to know that he can do his job........I don't need to know HOW. Information of this kind might be important to some, if it's likely to change their perception............but it isn't the kind of thing that would change mine. I already know the man. agirl

chrissyslave -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/27/2007 5:45:30 AM)
I am new with all this but if my mentor/Sir said he had been sub in the past then that would not be negative to me if was just part of his self discovery process (he has not BTW), but if he were a switch now I would have a problem with that, even outside of our relationship which is mostly on-line (24/7 would be even more negative to me). But here's a twist on this OP questions, what if it was a Domme instead who was a switch, instead of a Dom, then would that be more acceptable for her to be a switch? I am not in that position but if I were I would find that a real plus if in the past, and even okay if currently....to be a bit gendered biased here, though I could not fully explain this difference. Anyone else agree they would find this different? I think in part it would NOT as someone previously suggested that "I dislike the idea of not being able to meet all his needs" (I don't) but that the other side of him might be his truer self, and he would leave me, or be mixed in his mindset with me. With another slub/slave though (which he has) I feel less threatened and am comfortable in a balanced poly situation. In fact quite the opposite as he is Dom enough to be effective with 2, or possibly more, slaves under his control. Now a flip question for the Doms/Dommes out there, what if your sub/slave wanted to be a switch with someone else? Would you mind that, and let her or him?...beyond the idea of must have only a monogamous relationship aspect. But maybe this question is better for a new thread.

myobedience -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/27/2007 6:27:40 AM)
I have revisited this forum several times, reading thoughts and opinions. Its interesting to see the many variations. How can anyone conveniently "forget" to tell about the past? Is not truth part of communication? Omission is also dishonesty. If Sir would tell me even now, after a month of starting our journey, that he was a switch or sub at one point, i would NOT consider it a "forgot" to tell me. Why? We communicate in layers of trust, like peeling an onion. Dom/mes and subs a like take risks in peeling off the layers. If he were to tell me now, i would consider it a risk taking that he could not afford in the beginning. How can anyone, tell all there is to tell about ones self? Consider other IMPORTANT information: 1) when do you tell your "other" you have a disability...emotional, health or any other? 2.) when do you tell your "other" you are an alcoholic? ie, recovering 3.) when do you tell you "other" you spent use to write bad checks? or filed bankruptcy? 4.) when do you tell your "other" you are a member of NA? When do you tell your "other" anything? When the trust layer is needing to be deeper. To omit something LIKE the above until better trust is developed ...because it does take a risk, depends on the 2 people. To omit after several years..... IMHO is downright dishonesty about ones self. Its the same, IMHO, as the "other" revealing about his learning to be a better dominant by serving. You know it weird. When i meet the Dom in 2004, i had just gone through cervical cancer. i had to tell him when sex came into question, very early on. When i met Sir, i was telling him my schedule. An Echocardiogram was scheduled. So did i omit that or tell him? i told him. The response was so totally different in both situations. Because of it, i feel freer to be more open and honest faster with Sir. After all, is not the greatest leader also a great follower? Think about it.

LaTigresse -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/27/2007 6:54:15 AM)
So many wonderful posts. Thank you to everyone for bringing your thoughts to the thread. Chrissy, the gender differences are something that I think are probably more of an issue than people want to admit. I get the feeling that many hetro submissive women have a set idea of what their macho he-man dom should be. Anything that shakes that pedestal is scary and threatening. As an aside I almost have to wonder if those are the sort of dominant men that contact the female dominants but ask for secrecy. But that is most definately fodder for another thread. Since the bulk of the answers have come from hetro female sub/slaves, I hope that a more diverse crowd jumps in and adds their thoughts also. As far as being dominant and having a switch. I came very close to that very scenario and here was the way it was working with us. (the reason the relationship did not work had nothing at all to do with her being switch, I would explain but it would just derail a good thread) To be very honest I loved many of the qualities she has as a switch. My ego found it a HUGE turnon that a woman that usually was dominant with others, found something in me to be submissive with only me. As far as how the play and so forth worked. I am not a jealous person first of all. To watch her dominate another woman was a blast. Because she, in essence, belonged to me, she was an extension of me. She did not do anything with anyone without my approval. Sexually there were things she refused to do with them that would only be between us, example: oral sex. But there were things that she loved doing like wielding a strap-on or fisting a woman, that neither she nor I, would, or could imagine her doing to me. In addition she would not allow anyone but me to do those things to her. So you see, for me, it is not monogamy that is the issue at all. It is honesty, constant communication and defined boundaries. Had this relationship worked, she would have been allowed to have her play toys but the key is "allowed". I am the one in control. She knew that and wanted it that way.

LaTigresse -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/27/2007 7:01:23 AM)
Just a quick note regarding telling all. I think you will find very different points of view on this subject. As agirl has already stated, for many people it is not something needed or perhaps even wanted. There are many things that may be in someone's past I do not feel I need to know. However, if they feel they need to tell me everything I am always open to listen. I think the key on this particular subject is communicating your specific needs. If you need to know everything about a person to have a trusting relationship, it is your responsibility to explain that. Many people, especially many of my male friends, operate on a "need to know basis". They do not tell their female S.O. alot of things. More than you would imagine actually. Why? Not because they wish to be secretive but because they do not want to deal with the backlash from divulging the information.

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/27/2007 7:28:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chrissyslave Now a flip question for the Doms/Dommes out there, what if your sub/slave wanted to be a switch with someone else? Would you mind that, and let her or him?...beyond the idea of must have only a monogamous relationship aspect. But maybe this question is better for a new thread. In the most traditional Ms closed poly relationship, the dom usually really enjoys the subs switching with eachother in play. It rarely works with Ds switching though. In other closed relationships, it really depends on the people involved. In open Ds poly relationships, it's more common than not to be an S&M switch, if not also a Ds switch. So switching with others in other relationships is usually par for the course.

Arastella -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/27/2007 8:06:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub quote: ORIGINAL: Arastella why is BDSM these days so prodominantly sexually related??? I dunno. I suspect because many of us start with sex - tying people up during sex or being tied up. I suppose that makes sense. I just know that with Mistress and I, it's about submission, dedication, and service. Not sex. Those who think of it sexually, are different. For instance, someone who gets off on being spanked may go out of their way to misbehave in order to get spanked. I fear it. Lol

petstorm -> RE: OMG You did what?!?!?! (2/27/2007 8:38:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub quote: ORIGINAL: Arastella why is BDSM these days so prodominantly sexually related??? I dunno. I suspect because many of us start with sex - tying people up during sex or being tied up. Because BDSM IS about sex, where D/s is all the many factors of life that go with any relationship. i hate how the two are smudged into one lump title. smirk

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875