RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (Full Version)

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



Message

LadyPact -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/13/2007 5:29:02 PM)

I'm glad I wasn't the only one thinking about the most famous Clinton quote on this thread. 



Mysti -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/13/2007 5:32:27 PM)

I did not..have BDSM sexual relations with that subbie [:)]



SweetDommes -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/13/2007 5:59:55 PM)

hehehehe, that line always comes to mind when people try to claim that oral sex (or anal sex) isn't sex ... but it's right there in the name, people ... duh ... it always amazes me that so many people think that only P/V sex is sex *shakes head*



Griswold -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/13/2007 6:05:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Olias

Where are all the domm ladies in the North-East?


Sorry bud...about 7 months ago I built an extension on my place, a really kick ass place....and posted a notice on all the BDSM sites.

They're here.

(But they've all mentioned you).



Griswold -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/13/2007 6:08:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsKatHouston

quote:

mainly into body worship


I would hazard a guess that this is the issue, not intercourse.  If a guy gets so far with me that he is worshipping my body in intimate ways, then I'm likely going to want to go the rest of the way.  I would be a bit put off if he wanted to go down on me but not pleasure me sexually via intercourse.  I would, frankly feel used and frustrated. 

But I can take sex completely out of the equation also as could many many dominant females.  So what esle are you willing to do?  How else would you be of use to a dominant? 

quote:

I thought BDSM was NOT about sex


For me, body worship (your main interest) IS sex.  It may not be penetration but if I'm going to have an orgasm from it, it's sex in some form.


I would just like to say....and I mean this sincerely...I would have sex with all of you (well...unless of course you have an "outie").

(Am I a giver, or what????)



joyinslavery -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/13/2007 6:33:40 PM)

It's all about confusion.

And I'm not talking about yours.



Elorin -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/13/2007 6:41:42 PM)

I don't have male subs as sexual partners.
I could see that dynamic changing, but for now, it remains. I don't want to fuck my male subs unless it's my cock doing the fucking.

Having said that, I wouldn't be interested in the OP. Worship my hands, feet, hell, I'll even let ya have access to my knees and elbows if that floats your boat. But not my ass, not my pussy - I'm not interested.
 
BDSM isn't all about sex, but it is sure as hell sexy as hell. BDSM is about the power exchange - but lots of us have sex with our BDSM partners. I'm all ABOUT having sex with Sir, oh yes I am. I am just not interested in having sex (other than strapon play) with male subs.

~E



arayofsunshine55 -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/13/2007 7:30:01 PM)

Goodness I didn't read that in the manual.

Well we are human beings. not cookie cutter replicas of each other.  You need to be pickier and find someone who wants what you have to offer.  For me this is all in some way about sex in some way.  But that is me. My individual thing.  And I am very up front about it.  If you just want to take out my trash and suck my cunt there are other gals out there.  I am not yours.   After spending years without cock I'm gonna use it however I want.

This is my life.  And my bdsm will be about whatever I desire it to be including being about sex.  No matter what anyone else is doing.

As in all "relationships" find someone with whom you are compatible and expect that we each are looking for things which are unique to each of us.



MsCfromMelbourne -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/13/2007 8:53:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Olias


I thought BDSM was NOT about sex!!

Do many of the domme ladies need to feel tht their sub wants them?

Is the whole domme/sub thing based on the understaning that the sub wants sex & submits out of desperation for this.



Of course its all about sex.  BDSM is all about having a better sex life than if you were vanilla

Many have explained that BDSM sexually arouses them.

BDSM with intercourse is obviously sexual.

Less obvious though is that denial of intercourse can be very arousing and therefore is also sexual (even though you never get sex)

I suppose there might be situations where your play partner is so butt ugly (inside or out) that you feel no sexual attraction to him or her whatsoever.  I sincerely hope that is the exception not the norm in loving D/s relationships

I have played with friends with no intention of having sex (or body worship!), but I still wanted them to find mes gorgeous and sexy. 

BDSM is always about sex, sorry. But we pretend it is not because denial and unattainability are such great aphrodisiacs!







MsCfromMelbourne -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/13/2007 9:08:54 PM)

ahhh.....I just realised something

Pro dommes don't have penetrative sex with their clients because that would be prostitution.  The usually stop at body worship and giving a hand job or "forcing" the client to masturbate.

That limit suits their clients because they are usually married men wanting a "sexy" experience, but would be guilt ridden if they actually stuck their dick in a woman other than their partner.

OP, is that why you are seeking body worship, but you cannot go all the way?

If not, are you asexual due to an aversion to intercourse or impotence?  Perhaps make clear in your profile that you are unable - not unwilling - to perform that kind of sexual service.

Or do you feel safer with no pressure to perform sexually beyond body worship?  Performance anxiety is a terrible thing and we all get it.  You are far from alone

I often order submissive men not to fall in love with me.  Love is completely forbidden.  I will never reciprocate, so love is banned and they will be released if I suspect they are falling love.

They instantly fall hopelessly in love.  Works every time :)

Equally I order nervous submissives to please me sexually but they may never penetrate me.  Guess what?  Yep. 

Good old reverse psychology.  Submissive men always desparately want what they cannot get.

OP, does that help you understand why Dommes seem to send very mixed messages about intercourse?



KaramelGoddess -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/14/2007 7:14:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Samwhiplash


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lashra

I have to have sex in my play and that is because the play and power exchange makes me horny as hell. So my sub knows everytime we play he will have to perform sexually. Which is how he likes it as well.
~Lashra


Absolutely agree! For me bdsm and sex do go hand in hand. I would consider myself a very sexual person.... if I like someone enough to play with them... then you can assume that I find them sexually attractive and their submission to me gets my juices flowing anyway... and while I could obviously get myself off (or have them get me off somehow apart from penetration).... the intimate act of fucking with someone is often a beautiful close to a play scene for me.


I totally 100% agree.
 
I get incredibly turned on during a scene and to have My brains *bleeped* out after is ideal.
 
grins
 
~Kara



PsyVamp -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/14/2007 7:41:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlkTallFullfig

There are plenty of fem doms who seek a male for the exact role you describe...   I'm not one of them, because it is about domination, submission, and intimacy within my specifications, which for me include intercourse; but I've met several men who've said they've had relationships with women who never permitted intercourse...   So your thinking that it isn't is right for some people.     M


I could deal with having just a service slave... as long as I had a partner for intercourse on hand.. in the next room, or on the bed or... 

Psy... *who is really going to be frustrated if she keeps reading these posts..lol



TexasMaam -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/14/2007 10:31:22 PM)

Probably because they assume you're married.
TM


quote:

ORIGINAL: Olias

As a sub guy mainly into body worship I have predictably become adept at such tasks as foot, bottom and pussy worship & I am told that I am most satisfactory at all three but I am still not popular with ladies within the BDSM scene (the ones that I have been to find that is).

Please explain to me someone, If I am completely compliant in times of submission and if I perform my physical duties well then why is it that once a domme finds out that I am not looking for intercourse then I am dropped like a stone.

I thought BDSM was NOT about sex!!

My fantasy remains that I am available for the use, convenience and amusement of a lady, I am completely submissive, I attack my physical tasks with application and gusto and in finale, I seek nothing for myself, although this is, of course, the decision of the lady, and I am quite happy to be sent away once I have given the required service & hopefully pleasure so why, do many ladies run a mile simply because I want only this scenario & no intercourse.

Do many of the domme ladies need to feel tht their sub wants them?
Is the whole domme/sub thing based on the understaning that the sub wants sex & submits out of desperation for this.

Help me understand please.      

Where are all the domm ladies in the North-East?



littlesarbonn -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/14/2007 11:18:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thetammyjo

Olias, I think you are facing what I consider to be one of the greatest problems in female dominant and male submissive relationships today: confusion over what is expected.

Now this confusion is on the community level where women will complain that men only want sex or lie about being service oriented to get sex. The use of chastity or denial of orgasm is promoted as a way to deal with this "sex focused" man. Then the opposite complaints circulate that men can't get it up or shy away from the types of sex, often intercourse, when the women want it.

This gets promoted in pornography and erotica where the stereotype is the dom who dresses sexy and attempts to stir up sexual arousal then tells the sub that he is bad or punishes him for his desires.

The confusion then operates on the personal level when the same woman complains about both. I don't really get that myself except to say that perhaps the complaint is really more about authority and control; the dominant wants to control the when, why, and how of the sex.

I can imagine it is exceedingly confusing for any man to read all these ideas.

I think all of this leads to confusion for both men and women, doms and subs. Is it about sex or not? Is it primarily about sex or not? Are the words, clothes, actions, and activities reinforcing the things some complain about?

On a personal level I think it's a good start to examine what you want and need and then check out your behavior, words, and look to see if that meshes. If it doesn't, either the wants/needs or the behavior/etc needs to change or confusion will continue to reign.

On a community level, each person must be free to say what she or he feels. We might aid this by working on making our statements more personal and less generic. We might also refuse to buy things which do not support what we want or buy those things that do support what we want.


I think this sort of problem is fueled by yet another source, and that is professional domination that pretty much states that sexual intercourse is not part of the deal. Whether or not that is enforced is another question (although I will say that I NEVER requested or pushed for anything other than what was legal in such circumstances), but I think what happens is that a lot of these submissives get used to not being able to have intercourse, and sometimes anything even sexually related, like licking and all sorts of other "interesting" activities. So, when they start moving towards non-professional relationships, this sort of previous behavior is somewhat accepted.

I remember serving a dominant woman who was married to a male dominant. They had a completely open relationship where they both had slaves, and he had sex with his slave all of the time without any second thought. The marriage was completely open this way, and I'd heard them talk this way in the past. Well, one day, he and I were working in the garage (he needed some help, and we were friendly so I offered), and he was really curious about something because I represented the kind of male submissive he didn't understand, the service submissive. He asked how it was possible for someone like me to be so willing to do everything my mistress desired, but there was no sexual contact whatsoever. He wanted to know what was in it for me. Well, I stammered a bit and really didn't answer. I then found my mistress and told her about the conversation. Apparently, she never got around to informing him that sex WAS part of the relationship between her and HER slave. It kind of made things really tense for quite some time because I discovered it was okay for him, but it wasn't okay for her, even though both agreed that it was.



RoninTyger -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/15/2007 12:14:03 AM)

I dont confuse easily he he he!        Michael



FelinePersuasion -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/15/2007 12:14:09 AM)

It's about who ever doing it wants it to be, it might be about sex for y and z and then for a and b it's not about sex. For me with my life partner hell yeah it's about sex.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Olias


I thought BDSM was NOT about sex!!

\



RoninTyger -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/15/2007 12:21:21 AM)

according to old sigmund freud everything is about sex and ussually with your mother,the man was a freak.dealling with all those headaches a Dominant deserves to have their needs fullfilled. hire your self out as a cleaning service youll get all the work you can handle. believe me ive been there.         michael



RoninTyger -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/15/2007 12:22:39 AM)

go ahead and taste it what have you got to lose except your lunch



SusanofO -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/15/2007 3:15:38 AM)

Geez, if I couldn't have sex with a partner for some reason, I am really thinking I'd need intense cuddling, at least. I really, really love the intensity of that. In any case, at the very least, I crave an intense physical connection if I am emotionally involved (which is wee bit silly for me to say, as I can't think of any time in my life when I wasn't pretty intensly "emotionally involved" w/a partner I truly cared a lot about). It doesn't necessarily have to be frequent, or immediate, but if I am intensely attracted I will crave a physical connect, or at least the thought of one.

I am always "emotionally involved". There may have been times, that, for one reason or other, it has not been acted on, but if I really love, or even intensely like, someone, I am definitely "emotionally involved", as far as feeling passionate about them, and wanting the best for them, and thinking a lot about them (whether they are aware of it, or not).

*Although, I seem to have these weird moments, or weeks, where I just retreat into myself, and I still haven't quite figured that out - except I think it has to do with having a need for solitude, occasionally, and also guarding myself against possibly being hurt, and becoming "too intense" w/someone else, and it can scare me a little when I do that, even if I think I know why.

Also, unless I really know someone else really well, I am not always convinced it's going to be great for them, either, for me to be ultra-intense.

I will say, though, that if I have to choose between sex, and having an intense emotional connection w/someone, then I choose the emotional connection, hands-down, and having one is very important to me - but I think having both things at once, in one relationship, is absolutely ideal.

- Susan



SusanofO -> RE: I thought it wasn't about SEX (4/15/2007 5:41:23 AM)

To me though, it isn't necessarily all about sex. Given a choice (or having to make one), I choose an intense emotional connection, over sex or even bdsm activity. I just find if it's not there, even though a physical connection may be fun, and even get me feeling somewhat "connected" to someone, and I love it - that it won't make an intense emotional connection happen for me, if one hasn't been otherwise developed (or for some reason can't be).

I think this really might be a significant difference between men and women, because from what I can gather for many men, sex (or bdsm activity) is the way they make an emotional "connection" - it is one of the main methods they can use to establish one, anyway.

Many women I know need to feel one first, to find sexual or bdsm activity fulfilling (although this isn't true for all women I am pretty sure, and I've had an experience or two that was an exception to that in my own life, before).

I don't think this is probably anything many haven't already heard elsewhere, just saying I really do tend to think it's very true (for me anyway).

- Susan



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125