Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!!

Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

KnightofMists -> Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 4:23:52 PM)
Within the D/s dynamic it is often stated that a Dominant has a responsibility to protect the fulfillment of a submissives needs. However, it is also often stated that a Dominant is not obligated to fulfill the wants of a submissive. First... do you agree with this line of thought? secondly... So... If a Dominant never fulfilled any wants of the submissive. Would it reasonable to expect the submissive to stay in the relationship? I wonder if it is not a need to fulfill the wants of a submissive to some level. Note... I use the term submissive as a catch all phrase to identify all s-type individuals... Even that uber self-scarificing slave. As I pondered this line of thinking... (besides the obvious that every situation is subjective)... I was considering that needs perserve our existence... but it is the fulfillment of wants that may bring a sense of happiness and fulfillment that is beyond a level of just existing. Maslow theory speaks alot to this in many ways .. but I am wondering what are your thoughts on this topic.

GeekyGirl -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 4:28:57 PM)
I would say that a dominant should still fulfill a reasonable number of wants. Let's face it...our TRUE needs are not very many (shelter, clothing, food, water, air...). Everything else is really a "want" and without a certain number of those being fulfilled, the sub is not likely to stay around. Even such things as "mental health" and "emotional health" might be considered "wants" as opposed to "needs." I know for me personally, I have a large number of "wants" that I desire to be met within a relationship, and if they are not, I will leave. Some of them might even seem trivial to others ("I want to keep my 7 dogs" "I want to keep my present hair color and cut" "I want to be able to eat red meat" etc.)

Kalyndrah -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 4:32:13 PM)
Hm, Maslow and his hierarchy. I actually use that model a lot in explaining how certain things need to happen/occur/appear in my life in order for me to be a happy person. I've always been a supporter of a relationship, D/s or not, it should be an equal drive, a need if you will, to make sure the other person(s) in the relationship has everything they need, and all involved parties strive to provide the wants of the other parties. This would be the ultimate goal of a relationship - everyone loves everyone else and wants the best for them, yes? As for the Dominants who deny the wants of their submissives... well this can all be tricky. I do agree that a Dominant is not obligated to fulfill the wants of his submissive though. But everyone has wants. Some people have the want to have their wants NOT met. Therefore having a major want and what some might consider a need, fulfilled by being denied. I personally want a Dominant who wants to provide my wants, and needs to provide my needs as I am the same way. I get downright desperate to fulfill needs and sometimes wants if I know they're important to my Ally. And ... well, sometimes I get a little carried away and my wants, and sometimes even needs suffer, and he is there to make sure that while he's getting his wants and needs, I'm getting mine too, even if I'm voluntarily sacrificing mine so he can have his. Does this make sense? The voices are telling me it makes sense, but I know my voices, sometimes only I can understand their garbled chorus.

hisannabelle -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 4:33:20 PM)
i agree with the line of reasoning that a dominant is only required to fulfill a submissive's needs. that said, it's been my own experience, and my humble opinion, that if the dominant doesn't find pleasure in fulfilling at least some of the submissive's wants, some of the time, then that stunts relationship growth and will probably lead to the demise of the relationship. that said, i think (as discussed in a thread in the ask a master forum a bit ago) that it's not so much that dominants shouldn't fulfill submissives' wants so much as that by the nature of the relationship, these wants should be filled only when it pleases the dominant. i would not want to be with anyone who didn't get enjoyment from my pleasure, although the primary objective of any relationship for me is pleasing him, and the primary fulfillment i get would be his pleasure.

MadRabbit -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 4:38:51 PM)
I think people have a misconception of the notion of needs. To fulfill every possible "want" a submissive can think of would be impossible and dangerous as Padriag said in a previous thread. However, to fulfill only the "needs" of a slave in the sense of needs (water, food, shelter), I would wonder why the slave would be in a relationship with me. Most people are perfectly capable of fulfilling those "needs" on their own without my help. So when I think of "needs", I am thinking of things they need from the relationship, not needs in the sense of basic human needs. If their wasnt specific things they needed from me as a companion that they couldnt fulfill by being alone, they wont be in a relationship with me. Of course, I have to fulfill basic human needs (Dead bodies are hard to hide), but I think there is more to the concept of "needs" then just the basics. (For example, my attention and my praise towards the things they do for me). As far as "wants", well...those are treats and at my leisure. Just my two cents. Always open to be questioned or challenged.

Kalyndrah -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 4:43:15 PM)
This might seem silly, but it just occurred to me that my Ally and I are both switches though I wear his collar. He's the more dominant one, but we are switchy together. And that's the relationship that's made me happiest in my life. But that could be why I'm more focused on the give and take and the balance. There are extremists out there who only do the needs. I can't see those relationships lasting long, but some of them do. That is one of the things I think should go into service agreements well before collars are issued or claims upon another person are made. But that's just me and my overdone sense of equality spankin'.[sm=crop.gif] I mean speakin. [:D]

mstrjx -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 4:53:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GeekyGirl I have "wants" that I desire to be met within a relationship, and if they are not, I will leave. Excuse my paraphrasing. For most people, this sums it up. Regardless of what you wish to call it, we are talking about 'relationships'. What does it take to keep an s-type motivated to remain an 's' to that d-type? Personally, I call it the 'carrots', as in the horse reference. Horses (apparently) love carrots, and they will do WHATEVER IT TAKES to get them, if they are known to exist. (I wouldn't know that to be true one way or another, but let's run with it.) I have demonstrated time and again with partners that I can make 'me' and what comes with it an addiction by doling out the carrots. Let's say the carrot is 'pleasure'. I can mix an enormous amount of pain with the right amount of pleasure to keep a scene going indefinitely. But the carrot can be a lot of different things. Attention is another good one. Praise. Self-esteem. Whatever. I find it, and once I have found 'it', I can do whatever I wish. Not once (NEVER) have I ever had a submissive desire to leave me, once a relationship had begun. They get from me what feeds them, whatever it is, and I'm happy to do that if I wish to maintain the relationship. Let's take extreme examples to see if this can be disproved. A pure, selfless, service-oriented s-type. I would have to imagine their need/want is simply to be valued/needed. Their needs might not be 'material', and in my case above physical 'pleasure' would be considered material, but it is probably true that once they have the opportunity to serve (once they are 'in'), then their own motivations are enough to carry through. They don't REQUIRE external dominance. Someone with extreme fetishes/kinks, such that they have no desire other than to be 'used'. In a sense, that isn't too far from being service-oriented. In this case, once their 'kink' is discovered and fulfilled/maintained (such as degredation), then they can feed off of that. I think mayhaps I'll stand by the same credo I've had since I started. It's all in the carrots. Jeff

LuckyAlbatross -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 4:54:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists Within the D/s dynamic it is often stated that a Dominant has a responsibility to protect the fulfillment of a submissives needs. However, it is also often stated that a Dominant is not obligated to fulfill the wants of a submissive. First... do you agree with this line of thought? Not as a widespread absolute. As a personal preference, sure. quote: So... If a Dominant never fulfilled any wants of the submissive. Would it reasonable to expect the submissive to stay in the relationship? If this was how it had always been and the slave accepted it fully, it would be odd for her to change her mind later. But we are ever changing beings. I'd expect the relationship to grow unless something else changed (something else possibly being the slaves sense of fulfillment). I just don't want people staying in relationships because they are committed to being in a commitment. You get into a relationship (in theory) because of the person and should not feel trapped later because there is "a commitment" later on. It doesn't really matter what anyone says or does- it matters if it's working for you. Even if everyone is honest and forthright and does all the right "things" at all the right stages- people can still change. It would be wrong to keep a master or a slave trapped in a situation which no longer served them.

Llyren -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 5:01:50 PM)
Speaking only for myself, some of the wants are wanting things withheld. So in withholding, you are fueling the want. But my point about it being horrifically unfair to assume a submissive can better survive in a life barren of pleasure is still valid. While I will agree that a Dominant has the right to pick and choose wants, I will also argue that a Dominant does NOT have the right to make a submissive miserable on a basic level, and if said Dominant chooses to do so, then the sub has the right to leave and find someone else. If you truly care about someone, why wouldn't you want to do things that made them happy? [sm=preen.gif] P.S. I want to join the Lucky Albatross fan club too!

CreativeDominant -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 5:27:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KnightofMists Within the D/s dynamic it is often stated that a Dominant has a responsibility to protect the fulfillment of a submissives needs. However, it is also often stated that a Dominant is not obligated to fulfill the wants of a submissive. First... do you agree with this line of thought? As a basic overview on one aspect of the D/s relationship, yes. As a personal starting point, yes. Starting point... quote: secondly... So... If a Dominant never fulfilled any wants of the submissive. Would it reasonable to expect the submissive to stay in the relationship? Though I would have to state that it depends on the submissive, I can relate that my personal experience has been that when I was new and very zealous, I practiced the philosphy to a T. Only her needs were met by me whereas my needs AND wants were met by the submissive. Luckily for me, my first submissive had experience and there came a point when I was asked why her wants were not being considered. When I explained the above to her, she noted that the philosophy meet indeed work as a mantra for some dominants and submissives but that it didn't work for her and, she suspected, it wasn't working all that well for me. She also figured it wouldn't work well for the majority of submissives to never have their wants considered and occasionally tended to. She knew that I saw it as somewhat selfish and was struggling with it and not doing a very good job of overcoming that struggle even while trying valiantly. quote: I wonder if it is not a need to fulfill the wants of a submissive to some level. Note... I use the term submissive as a catch all phrase to identify all s-type individuals... Even that uber self-scarificing slave. As I pondered this line of thinking... (besides the obvious that every situation is subjective)... I was considering that needs perserve our existence... but it is the fulfillment of wants that may bring a sense of happiness and fulfillment that is beyond a level of just existing. Maslow theory speaks alot to this in many ways .. but I am wondering what are your thoughts on this topic. I don't know Maslow's theory but I do know that I am not all that happy of a camper when only my needs are being met. One time when I was in the service, I was out in the field for quite awhile...nothing to read, no off-time, only work and eat and sleep and................conversation. God, how I relished the hours when I was off-shift and engaged in conversation with other soldiers. Not a need being met but that want of contact with another. (although I suppose it can be argued whether or not communication with another over non-vital issues is a need or a want). That field time made me appreciate the ability to have my wants met as well as my needs. Then years later, I get into D/s and I try my best as a newbie to implement the "I am only obligated to fulfill my submissive's needs...her wants are doled out when I deem it important...but my needs AND WANTS are always important". When I listened to the advice of my first, things became a lot more pleasant. I did not grant her every want when she wanted it but neither did I work overtime to make sure it was all about my wants and needs only. I also experienced a deeper feeling of happiness and satisfaction within myself as her...and subsequent submissives'...pleasure over my recognition that their wants had a place in our relationship, no matter whether a casual or serious relationship, made their submission a more pleasing experience.

lonlyrossInNeed -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 5:36:01 PM)
the submissive slave has needs that need to be met but has wants also i think that there are a few needs that need to be met by the dominant partner but just a few in my mind 1 would be that the dominant would have to care and protect there submissive from harm 2 woudl be that the dominant would love and cherish there slave - submissive. now there are the wants wants to me are fantasis and things that the slave- submissive would like its kinda like nasesity and wants nesisties are needed and the wants are just that somthing wanted but not needed . ross.g

mnottertail -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 5:37:54 PM)
you NEED some spell check. Ron

MagiksSlave -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 5:46:07 PM)
a person can live with nothing but some bread water and air.. but given the choice who would want to!!! Magik's slave

sleazybutterfly -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 5:48:50 PM)
I have needs and I have wants, he has needs and he has wants. We both put what it takes into our relationship to keep the other one happy. We both know that if we aren't satisfied with what we are getting, we can both move on. I think we have both been thru enough to know what we were looking for. I think everyone deserves to get what they want out of a relationship.. be it sex, play, total control, some control..etc. If it gives you want you need or want, you are more likely to do what it takes to make it last.

szobras -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 5:53:51 PM)
I do agree that a Dominant has the obligation is fulfill the submissive’s needs. IMO, I think a Dominants obligation is to the best interest of the relationship. I do not think that we as humans consider entering into any type of relationship without the desire to have some level of wants to be met in some way, as well as our needs. For me I believe that unless a certain amount of wants are also fulfilled by both in the relationship, I would not expect the relationship last. I believe the physical,mental, and spiritual welfare of a submissive falls withinin the Dominants obligation of those best interests. For some perhaps, all they ever wanted, is just what they needed. I believe there is a difference between existing and “living”, and have yet to meet a person who’s only want, was only to exist.

Sinergy -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 5:58:05 PM)
Hello A/all, I would have to agree with the poster who pointed out that a s-type person might have a need/want to have their wants/needs not met. This, I suppose, is one aspect to it. It is easy to say that a Dominant should provide for her/his/its extrinsic needs, like food, clothing, comfort, beatings, anal sex, whatever. I imagine this oversimplifies the issue because I think a lot of what draws people into this life style are more intrinsic needs. The need to be loved, cherished, respected, Dominated, required to submit, the feeling of safety and freedom in one's chains, the feeling of love and certainty while one does the chaining, whatever. Needs which cannot really be quantified but which exist nonetheless. To summarize, I think it is intrinsic needs which this lifestyle meets, despite the fact that most web sites and books talking about it tend to deal in extrinsic needs. Just me, yadda yadda yadda. Sinergy

FelinePersuasion -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 6:18:22 PM)
Wanting to keep your pets isn't trivial to me. I'd discard any one the minuute they ever indicated I couldn't keep my animal, nor could I have any more after him. quote: ORIGINAL: GeekyGirl Some of them might even seem trivial to others ("I want to keep my 7 dogs" "I want to keep my present hair color and cut" "I want to be able to eat red meat" etc.)

Llyren -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 6:23:23 PM)
Mentioning pets does bring an analogy to mind. If you have an actual pet, a cat or a dog, would you keep it in a bland, sterile environment, giving it only minimal interaction and the plainest possible food and water? Frankly, if you would, I want to know now so I can stay faaaaar away from you. [sm=preen.gif]

freakgoddess -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 6:32:49 PM)
No, I am not obligated...but I'd definitely want the relationship to be as fulfilling for the sub as it is for me. I might make him beg though.

nissa -> RE: Wants are Wants till they become Needs???!!! (3/15/2007 6:33:01 PM)
quote: Within the D/s dynamic it is often stated that a Dominant has a responsibility to protect the fulfillment of a submissives needs. However, it is also often stated that a Dominant is not obligated to fulfill the wants of a submissive. First... do you agree with this line of thought? I do agree with this line of thought. quote: So... If a Dominant never fulfilled any wants of the submissive. Would it reasonable to expect the submissive to stay in the relationship? I don't know, I guess it would come down to exactly WHAT the submissive/slave actually wanted from the relationship. I know submissives/slaves who are with Dominants, and have been for many years, and in those years, their Dominant has never gone an extra mile in fulfilling anything except the basic needs. And yet these submissives and slaves are quite happy where they are. On the other hand, I have also known some who have walked from relationships because they felt they were not getting what they needed. For myself, I will admit that even though I acknowledge the FACT that Master Bull will NEVER be OBLIGATED to fulfill my wants; it is also reality that there are going to be some that will need to be filled. In my past relationship, it was the same way. He was never under any obligation what-so-ever to pander to my wants; he did so because he wished to and for no other reason. It all comes down to what each wants from the relationship.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875